Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma

Transcription

1 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC1/h1 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Parc Puw, Drefach Felindre Site Area (Ha): Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Allocated for residential development (CL1a) Relevant Planning History Various applications have been received on the site including more recently: W/15093 RM approved for 25 houses 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

2 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality No Yes?

3 Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site is the remaining land of the residential estate known as Parc Puw and consists of relatively flat overgrown land. The site as a whole is allocated in the Carmarthenshire Unitary Development Plan for residential use. 25 dwellings have been built on part of the site allocated in the UDP, recorded in the 2010 Joint Housing Land Availability Study. The western part of the site is mainly surrounded by residential properties, while the eastern parcel of land is triangular in shape and is surrounded by residential properties on two sides and open fields on the third. It is considered that the land continues to be appropriate for residential development and as such should be allocated for residential development, suitable for 40 dwellings (based on 15 units on the remaining dwellings per hectare, and also incorporating the completed 25 dwellings as they have been completed after the base date of the Plan).

4 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: -13 Score Summary Count Issues Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities The main issue relates to the distance of the settlement from the nearest railway line. Opportunities: The site lies on a high frequency bus route, air quality is considered to be good in the area, the site is close to a recycling centre and close to the national cycle network and generally close to facilities such as post offices, shop and community hall. Further All sites within the villages of Waungilwen and Drefach-Felindre have produced a negative sustainability score. This appears to be due to the landscape designations adjoining the site. This site is located within the centre of the settlement, thus contributing to the social fabric of the community. See score card for further detail. 8. Technical Officer Group Dyfed Archaeological Trust Category E - This site can be allocated in the LDP as it is unlikely that historic environment interests will be adversely affected by a development proposal. Highways This refers to two distinct locations either site of an estate road. Western area access appears to be across verge and between parking areas. Visibility splays to be provided and secured. Eastern area has access to the estate cul-de-sac and a number of properties is possible here a maimum of 16No in total to be served by the eisting estate road. Site is not contiguous with the highway and may also depend on availability of CS1067 for access. Environment Agency Biodiversity & Fisheries: No known issues. Pollution Prevention: There are currently no significant water body issues. However, your Authority must ensure that this development will not cause deterioration of the water environment thus impacting on the Water Framework Directive classification. In addition we recommend consultation with DCWW to ensure that there is adequate hydraulic and biological capacity with the pumping station to serve this level of growth Flood Risk: Sites are in close proimity to the fluvial flood outline. A FCA may be required at the time of the application as our flood maps do not take into account climate change allowance and blockages of in-river structures. SuDS. Groundwater & Contaminated Land: No known issues. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

5 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: CS1017 Site Ref (where applicable): / SC1/h2 Location: Land opposite Geryllan, Drefach Felindre Site Area (Ha): 2.99 Eisting Use* Agricultural Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Outside development limits Relevant Planning History D4/438 Residential development 1973 D4/ dwellings 1985 W/15446 (on part) Change of use from agricultural land to storage area for agricultural machinery sales. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

6 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

7 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site consists of two relatively flat agricultural fields, to the north-east flows the Nant Bargod, and part of the site lies within the C2 flood risk area. The site lies in the centre of the village, close to the amenities and facilities. To allocate the whole of the site would be unacceptable as it would provide too much housing for the settlement, however, it is considered acceptable to allocate part of the site for residential development, that part closest to the centre of Drefach, suitable for 30 dwellings. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: -28 Score Summary Count Issues Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities The main issue relates to the distance of the settlement from the nearest railway line, that the site lies adjacent to a historic landscape area and special landscape area.

8 Opportunities: Further The site lies on a high frequency bus route, air quality is considered to be good in the area, the site is close to a recycling centre and close to the national cycle network and close to facilities such as post offices, shops and community hall. All sites within the villages of Waungilwen and Drefach-Felindre have produced a negative sustainability score. This appears to be due to the landscape designations adjoining the site. The site is located within the centre of the settlement, thus contributing to the social fabric of the community. See score card for further detail. 8. Technical Officer Group Dyfed Archaeological Trust Category C - The proposed allocation and development of this site may impact adversely on an important heritage asset, which is unlikely to be of such importance that allocation cannot proceed. However, prior to the determination of a planning application this site should be assessed/evaluated to determine more precisely the character and etent of the heritage asset. Highways Environment Agency No observations. Biodiversity & Fisheries: No known issues. Pollution Prevention: There are currently no significant water body issues. However, your Authority must ensure that this development will not cause deterioration of the water environment thus impacting on the Water Framework Directive classification. In addition we recommend consultation with DCWW to ensure that there is adequate hydraulic and biological capacity with the pumping station to serve this level of growth Flood Risk: The proposed allocation lies partially within zone C2, as defined by the development advice maps referred to under TAN 15 Development and Flood Risk (July 2004). In accordance with TAN15, residential developments and emergency services are regarded as highly vulnerable and should not be permitted within zone C2. We would advise that the site allocation boundary is amended to eclude the flood risk area (including the access & egress) as the current allocation would be contrary to National Policy and could potentially make the plan unsound. Groundwater & Contaminated Land: No known issues. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

9 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC1/h3 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Land at Waungilwen Road, Waungilwen Site Area (Ha): Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Allocated for residential use (CL1c) Relevant Planning History No recent permissions. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

10 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

11 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site is located off the eastern flank of the road from Drefach-Fellindre to Waungilwen. It is currently allocated for residential development in the Carmarthenshire Unitary Development Plan. The site consists of part of a wider agricultural field, currently laid to grass, which currently has high hedgerow facing the road. The site is linear, and is bounded by a residential property to the north west, storage for agricultural machinery to the south east of the site, and further agricultural fields to the east of the site. It is considered appropriate to maintain the allocation on this site as it s development would round of the settlement at this location, and would be suitable for 5 dwellings. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: -11 Score Summary Count Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities

12 Issues The main issue relates to the distance of the settlement from the nearest railway line. Opportunities: The site lies on a high frequency bus route, air quality is considered to be good in the area, the site is close to a recycling centre and close to the national cycle network and generally close to facilities such as post offices, shop and community hall. Further All sites within the villages of Waungilwen and Drefach-Felindre have produced a negative sustainability score. This appears to be due to the landscape designations adjoining the site. This site is located within the centre of the settlement, thus contributing to the social fabric of the community. See score card for further detail. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

13 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: Various see last page Site Ref (where applicable): / SC1/h4 Location: Opposite Springfield (CL1e) Site Area (Ha): 0.71 Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Allocated for residential use for 6 units (CL1e) Relevant Planning History W/19978 outline application submitted for residential use, pending. W/ application submitted for residential use, pending. Other applications on the site have been withdrawn. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

14 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

15 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional A number of representations have been received in relation to this site. The site is allocated in the UDP, suitable for 6 dwellings and a number of applications have been forthcoming in recent years on the site which have generated considerable local opposition. There is currently no valid planning permission on the site, it s only status is that it is allocated for residential use in the UDP. The site is a level, grassed field located in the centre of the village. The site is largely surrounded by dwellings on it s south and eastern sides and by fields to the north-west. The land slopes downwards to the north of the site. The field has strong, mature hedgerows. The main objections submitted by the respondents relate to the following issues, and are discussed in turn below: Coalescence Impact on biodiversity Increase in traffic Increase in population Surface water problems Public Rights of Way Welsh language

16 Coalescence It is considered that the allocation of the site would not lead to coalescence of two areas of the village and would not damage the character of the area, it would round off the settlement in this area. Biodiversity An ecological survey was submitted at the request of the Countryside Council for Wales as part of the recent planning application. The survey identified the site as poor quality semi-improved field with areas of enrichment. A further, more detailed survey was subsequently undertaken as the site was considered to be a Biodiversity Action Plan habitat which resulted in the applicant submitting an amended plan to safeguard the north western part of the site from development for biodiversity reasons. It is therefore considered that there is no need to amend the site area as the biodiversity interests on the site can be safeguarded as part of any planning permission on the site. Traffic No concerns have been raised about any increase in traffic by the Head of Transport who was consulted as part of the planning application. Should the planning application be approved, the Head of Transport has recommended conditions to be imposed on any planning permission relating to visibility, parking facilities, the provision of a footway and road widening. Increase in population Population projections undertaken as part of the initial LDP work show an increase in the County s population during the plan period. The preferred LDP strategy defines a structured settlement framework with growth/development distributed in a manner which reflects the hierarchical standing of settlements. The allocated sites in Waungilwen during the Plan period are considered appropriate to meet the LDP s preferred strategy. Surface water The recent planning application proposes to use a series of ponds to control the surface water discharge rate at the north western end of the site before travelling under the road to the river. The system of ponds or Sustainable Drainage Systems is encouraged in national policy. The Environment Agency raised no objection to this method of surface water disposal on the site and are satisfied, subject to the imposition of conditions. Public right of way Objectors state that a public footpath traverses the site, this is not the case, it does go through the site known as Opposite Spingfield which lies opposite ths site. Any footpath can be incorporated into a scheme. Welsh language Planning conditions can be implemented at the planning application stage to mitigate any demonstrated adverse affects, however, it is considered that the numbers proposed on this site would not have a detrimental affect on the Welsh language in the area. Welsh language impact assessments were submitted as part of the recent application, although these related to a larger number of units proposed on the site, one submitted by the applicant and one by the objectors. Both assessments came out with differing scores and were referred to the Welsh Language Board for comment. The Board concluded that by providing some affordable units on the site (although based on a significantly larger number) this would provide a greater opportunity for the eisting balance of Welsh speakers and no-welsh speakers to continue. Some other issues were raised by objectors, however, these are determined to be issues that are not of material planning consideration. In conclusion, the site is an established and appropriate allocation and it is considered to be suitable for the allocation of 6 residential units. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: -34 Score Summary Count Issues Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities The main issue relates to the distance of the settlement from the nearest railway line, that the site lies adjacent to a historic landscape area and special landscape

17 area. Opportunities: The site lies on a high frequency bus route, air quality is considered to be good in the area, the site is close to a recycling centre and close to the national cycle network and generally close to facilities such as post offices, shop and community hall. Further All sites within the villages of Waungilwen and Drefach-Felindre have produced a negative sustainability score. This appears to be due to the landscape designations adjoining the site. This site is located within the centre of the settlement, thus contributing to the social fabric of the community. See score card for further detail. 8. Technical Officer Group Dyfed Archaeological Trust Category E - This site can be allocated in the LDP as it is unlikely that historic environment interests will be adversely affected by a development proposal. Highways Environment Agency Planning permission eists for this site. No observations Biodiversity & Fisheries: Looks like BAP habitat. Survey required. Pollution Prevention: There are currently no significant water body issues. However, your Authority must ensure that this development will not cause deterioration of the water environment thus impacting on the Water Framework Directive classification. In addition we recommend consultation with DCWW to ensure that there is adequate hydraulic and biological capacity with the pumping station to serve this level of growth Flood Risk: We have provided comments regarding this site as part of recent planning consultations. Our advice is still relevant in respect of flood risks. SuDS. Groundwater & Contaminated Land: No known issues. CCW The eclusion of this site is recommended due to the high ecological interest of the unimproved grassland. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

18 Candidate Sites submitted against site Candidate Proposed Use Site ref CS0367 To remain the same CS0568 To remain the same infinitum CS CS0571 To remain the same infinitum CS0574 To remain the same infinitum CS0576 To remain the same infinitum CS0578 To remain the same infinitum CS CS0581 To remain the same infinitum CS0584 To remain the same infinitum CS0586 To remain the same infinitum CS0588 To remain the same infinitum CS0590 To remain the same infinitum CS0592 To remain the same infinitum CS0594 To remain the same infinitum CS0826 To remain the same infinitum CS0827 To remain the same infinitum CS0829 To remain the same infinitum CS0833 To remain the same infinitum CS0835 To remain the same infinitum CS0839 To remain the same infinitum CS0841 To remain the same infinitum CS0843 To remain the same infinitum CS0844 To remain the same infinitum CS0845 To remain the same infinitum CS0846 To remain the same infinitum

19 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: Various see last page Site Ref (where applicable): / SC1/h5 Location: Land at Arwel (CL1b) Site Area (Ha): 1.05 Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Allocated for residential use for 11 units (CL1b) Relevant Planning History W/18601 outline application submitted for residential use, pending. W/ application submitted for residential use, pending. Other applications on the site have been withdrawn. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

20 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

21 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional A number of representations have been received in relation to this site. The site is allocated in the UDP, suitable for 11 dwellings, four of which have already been built. A number of planning applications have been forthcoming in recent years on the site which have generated considerable local opposition. There is currently no valid planning permission on the site, it s only status is that it is allocated for residential use in the UDP. The site is a gently sloping, grassed field located in the centre of the village. The site is largely surrounded by dwellings on it s north, north-west and north eastern sides and by fields to the south-west. The land slopes downwards from the south-western end towards the roadside. Where the field abuts agricultural land, there are strong, mature hedgerows. The main objections submitted by the respondents relate to the following issues, and are discussed in turn below: Coalescence Impact on biodiversity Increase in traffic Increase in population Surface water problems

22 Public Rights of Way Welsh language Coalescence It is considered that the allocation of the site would not lead to coalescence of two areas of the village and would not damage the character of the area, it would round off the settlement in this area. Biodiversity application. An ecological survey was not submitted or requested for the recent planning Traffic No concerns have been raised about any increase in traffic by the Head of Transport who was consulted as part of the planning application. Should the planning application be approved, the Head of Transport has recommended conditions to be imposed on any planning permission relating to visibility, parking facilities, the provision of a footway and road widening. Increase in population Population projections undertaken as part of the initial LDP work show an increase in the County s population during the plan period. The preferred LDP strategy defines a structured settlement framework with growth/development distributed in a manner which reflects the hierarchical standing of settlements. The allocated sites in Waungilwen during the Plan period are considered appropriate to meet the LDP s preferred strategy. Surface water The recent planning application proposes to use a series of ponds to control the surface water discharge rate at the north western end of the site before travelling under the road to the river. The system of ponds or Sustainable Drainage Systems is encouraged in national policy. The Environment Agency raised no objection to this method of surface water disposal on the site and are satisfied, subject to the imposition of conditions. Public right of way A public footpath traverses the site, however this can be incorporated into any scheme put forward on the site. Welsh language Planning conditions can be implemented at the planning application stage to mitigate any demonstrated adverse affects, however, it is considered that the numbers proposed on this site would not have a detrimental affect on the Welsh language in the area. Welsh language impact assessments were submitted as part of the recent application, although these related to a larger number of units proposed on the site, one submitted by the applicant and one by the objectors. Both assessments came out with differing scores and were referred to the Welsh Language Board for comment. The Board concluded that by providing some affordable units on the site (although based on a significantly larger number) this would provide a greater opportunity for the eisting balance of Welsh speakers and no-welsh speakers to continue. Some other issues were raised by objectors, however, these are determined to be issues that are not of material planning consideration. In conclusion, the site is an established and appropriate allocation and it is considered to be suitable for the allocation of 7 residential units. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: -16 Score Summary Count Issues Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities The main issue relates to the distance of the settlement from the nearest railway line, that the site lies adjacent to a historic landscape area and special landscape area. Opportunities: The site lies on a high frequency bus route, air quality is considered to be good in the area, the site is close to a recycling centre and close to the national cycle

23 network and generally close to facilities such as post offices, shop and community hall. Further All sites within the villages of Waungilwen and Drefach-Felindre have produced a negative sustainability score. This appears to be due to the landscape designations adjoining the site. This site is located within the centre of the settlement, thus contributing to the social fabric of the community. See score card for further detail. 8. Technical Officer Group Dyfed Archaeological Trust Category E - This site can be allocated in the LDP as it is unlikely that historic environment interests will be adversely affected by a development proposal. Highways Environment Agency Planning permission eists for this site. No observations Biodiversity & Fisheries: Looks like BAP habitat. Survey required. Pollution Prevention: There are currently no significant water body issues. However, your Authority must ensure that this development will not cause deterioration of the water environment thus impacting on the Water Framework Directive classification. In addition we recommend consultation with DCWW to ensure that there is adequate hydraulic and biological capacity with the pumping station to serve this level of growth Flood Risk: We have provided comments regarding this site as part of recent planning consultations. Our advice is still relevant in respect of flood risks. SuDS. Groundwater & Contaminated Land: No known issues. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

24 Candidate Sites submitted against site Candidate Proposed Use Site ref CS0366 To remain the same CS0567 To remain the same infinitum CS CS0572 To remain the same infinitum CS0573 To remain the same infinitum CS0575 To remain the same infinitum CS0577 To remain the same infinitum CS0579 To remain the same infinitum CS0582 To remain the same infinitum CS0583 To remain the same infinitum CS0585 To remain the same infinitum CS0587 To remain the same infinitum CS0589 To remain the same infinitum CS0591 To remain the same infinitum CS0593 To remain the same infinitum CS0825 To remain the same infinitum CS0828 To remain the same infinitum CS0830 To remain the same infinitum CS0831 To remain the same infinitum CS0832 To remain the same infinitum CS0834 To remain the same infinitum CS0836 To remain the same infinitum CS0837 To remain the same infinitum CS0838 To remain the same infinitum CS0840 To remain the same infinitum CS0842 To remain the same infinitum

25 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC2/H1 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Brogeler, Llangeler Site Area (Ha): 0.32ha Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Residential allocation (CL2/a) Relevant Planning History D4/12335/44 Refusal of outline permission for residential development 2/4/1985. D4/26014/44 Outline permission for residential development 7/11/1995. The site is not subject to a valid planning permission. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

26 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The majority of the built form within the settlement has developed in a ribbon pattern and as such the settlement is characterised by a linear pattern of development. However, the candidate site is of a suitable shape and size to accommodate more than single plot depth and therefore development on the site could take place without etending the eisting ribbon pattern. Q.6 Additional considerations: No Yes?

27 General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown The site is located within a mudstone and slate mineral resource safeguarding area and a 200m buffer would be required between any quarry with permission to be worked and the settlement limits. Taking into consideration the small scale of the site and its proimity to eisting residential dwellings to the north and to the south it is considered that residential development and on this site alone would not have a significant adverse impact upon the resource. The whole settlement is located within a Special Landscape Area (SLA) and development on the site should respect the qualities of its surrounding landscape. It is considered that development on the site would not have an adverse impact upon the qualities of the SLA and could make a positive contribution to the landscape. The candidate site can be accessed directly from the A484 road at the site s south-western boundary. The Carmarthenshire County Council Highways division have noted that there would

28 be a visibility requirement of metres and that visibility on this road is restricted. The required visibility splays are attainable from the site s frontage. It is possible that an alternative access to the site could be accommodated directly from a widened part of the road which adjoins the properties to the south-east of the site. However, this would require the access arrangements to cross over third party land and this might not be potentially viable. There are no known biodiversity issues which would potentially impact upon species or habitat of high importance. 6. Additional The candidate site forms part of a level agricultural field located at the edge of the settlement. The site is currently located within the CUDP development limits of Llangeler and is allocated for residential development with an indicative number of 6 dwellings. The site does not have a current planning consent however, the principle of residential development on the site has previously been approved and the site was granted outline consent in The site adjoins the A484 road to the south-west and beyond that lies open countryside. To the south-east of the site is a ribbon pattern of residential development which links the site to the centre of the village. To the north the site is bounded by open countryside which is predominantly used for grazing. The site s boundaries are defined by eisting field boundaries of hedgerow and trees. There is no eisting boundary or topographical feature which defines the site s north-east side however this boundary would represent a logical continuation of the eisting built form and development limits. The eisting urban form, at the northern part of the settlement, etends partly across a field. The candidate site forms the remainder of the road frontage of this field and is located in between the adjoining dwellings and the field s north-western boundary. Development of the remainder of this field s frontage would be a logical etension of the built form in Llangeler. Furthermore, the field s north-western boundary would provide the settlement with a natural, defensible and well-defined boundary comprising of hedgerow and trees. There is a village hall and a church within the village of Llangeler, both of which are within walking distance of the site. The site is also within walking distance of a well-serviced public bus stop, and has direct access to the highway network, which would link the site to larger settlements and other key facilities and services beyond Llangeler. For the reasons noted above the candidate site is considered to be potentially suitable for residential development. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: -45 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 8 3 Medium 2 0 High 5 11 Significant issues arise in relation to three sustainability topics: Climatic Factors, Landscape and Population. Issues relating to landscape arise as a result of the site s proimity to a Special Landscape Area and Historic Landscape Area. Issues

29 relating to climatic factors are the result of access to services and significant issues are noted under population as a result of the site s IMD ranking. Opportunities: Significant opportunities arise in relation to Air Quality, Climatic Factors, Material Assets, Economy and Social Fabric as a result of the site s access to public transport services. Other significant opportunities arise under Health and Wellbeing and Population in relation to the settlement s IMD ranking and access to services. Further The issues and opportunities which arise in relation to the site are largely reflective of issues and opportunities which would affect the settlement as a whole. There are other sites which have achieved a higher score in terms of the sustainability appraisal, however, this is as a result of the site s relative proimity to a bus stop. The candidate site is approimately 400m from a bus stop which is within walking distance. It is not considered that this issue alone does not outweigh the benefits of reallocating this site for residential use.

30 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC2/h2 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Land adjoining Brynywawr, Pentrecwrt Site Area (Ha): 0.74ha Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Adjoins the development limits Relevant Planning History Application D4/338/44 for residential development was refused permission on 22/07/74 due to a deficiency in the provision of facilities for sewerage and sewage disposal. Development has since taken place in close proimity to the site and has overcome these utilities issues. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

31 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value A large proportion of the settlement falls within the floodzone as indicated on the TAN 15 Development Advice Maps which consequently limits the number of suitable sites which are available for residential development. The floodzone is located to the north of the site and is separated from it by the B4335 road. Due to the site s proimity to an identified floodzone the Environment Agency (EA) has noted that a site level survey would be required in support of any future planning application relating to the site.

32 However, the EA have not noted an objection to the allocation of the site and this is an issue to be addressed at application stage. The EA have also noted that a buffer strip would be required along the watercourse which adjoins the site s south-eastern boundary and that SUDS should be implemented as part of any development. These aspects are considered through policies EP1 and EP3 of the LDP which provide that watercourses shall be safeguarded through the implementation of buffer zones where appropriate and provide that there is a requirement to implement SUDS unless where it is justifiable not to do so. The whole settlement is located within the Teifi Valley Special Landscape Area (SLA) and development within the settlement should respect the quality of its surrounding landscape. It is considered that development on the site would not have an adverse impact upon the qualities of the SLA and could make a positive contribution to the landscape. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period.

33 Yes No Unknown A suitable vehicular access could be achieved directly from the B4335 road along the site s northern boundary and adequate visibility splays ( metres) could also attained. No issues have been raised by the Countryside Council for Wales or by the Carmarthenshire County Council Planning Ecologist in relation to the impact which development would have upon species or habitats of high importance. It is therefore considered that development on the site would be unlikely to impact upon species or habitats of high importance. 6. Additional The candidate site is located in the centre of Pentrecwrt and adjoins the junction between the A486 and B4335 roads. The site s northern edge adjoins the B4335 road and beyond that road is a builtup residential area. To the west of the site is the residential property of Brynywawr and there is a play area which adjoins the site to the south-east. The site s boundaries are defined by eisting field boundaries of hedgerow and trees and there is also a small watercourse which defines the site s south-eastern boundary. The site could potentially accommodate 15 dwellings at 20 dwellings per hectare. However, taking into account the required buffer zone adjoining the watercourse and the site s irregular shape this figure may be reduced. The site is centrally located in the main built-up area of the settlement and in close proimity to a well-serviced public bus stop and has the benefit of direct access to the highway network which links the sites to other larger settlements. Furthermore, the site is within walking distance of two public houses and a village hall. The main built form in Pentrecwrt is centred on and around the junction between the A486 (Saron Road) and B4335 roads and development on the site would be well-integrated to this built-up area. Due to the site s proimity to the eisting residential built form and location in the centre of the settlement it is considered that the site offers an appropriate option in terms of location and impact upon the amenity and character of the settlement and the surrounding Teifi Valley Special Landscape Area. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: -89 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 7 3 Medium 2 1 High 5 6 Significant issues arise in relation to four sustainability topics: Climatic Factors, Landscape, Cultural Heritage and Population. Issues relating to landscape and cultural heritage arise as a result of the site s proimity to a Teifi Valley Special Landscape Area and Historic Landscape Area. Issues relating to climatic factors are the result of access to services and significant issues are noted under population as a result of the site s IMD ranking.

34 Opportunities: Significant opportunities arise in relation to Material Assets and Social Fabric as a result of the site s access to public transport, cycling and pedestrian services as well as general services and facilities. Other significant opportunities arise under Health and Wellbeing and Population in relation to the settlement s IMD ranking and access to services. Further The issues and opportunities which arise in relation to the site are largely reflective of issues and opportunities which would affect the settlement and wider area as a whole mainly due to its rural contet and proimity to facilities and services. However, as noted above, the site is within walking distance of the village hall and two public houses.

35 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC2/h3 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Land adj. Tyddyn y Celyn, Saron Site Area (Ha): 0.48ha Eisting Use* Residential (partly developed) *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* Residential 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Allocated for residential development (CL2/c) Relevant Planning History The site was allocated for residential development in the Carmarthenshire Unitary Development Plan (UDP) and 4 dwellings have been built on the UDP allocated site. 24/06/75 - D4/330 Outline consent for residential development 10/09/87 D4/14959 Outline consent for siting of buildings plots 18/04/90 D4/18369 Reserved Matters ystad o dai site layout for housing. 12/09/02 - TMT/01971 full permission for 3 dwellings, only 1 of which was built under this consent (plot 14). 17/9/03 - TMT/04718 full permission for 1 dwelling (plot 7) 07/09/04 - W/07594 full permission for 1 dwelling (plot 9) 21/12/07 - W/17654 full permission for 1 dwelling (plot 12) 24/02/10 W/22308 full permission for the construction of a detached dwelling and garage (plot 13). The remainder of the site, measuring 0.48ha, remains undeveloped. The site could potentially accommodate a further 8 dwellings. This part of the site is assessed as to its suitability to be retained as a residential allocation in the LDP. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons:

36 not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits) 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development

37 General Planning Principles No Yes Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths

38 Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The candidate site comprises 4 dwellings and 8 undeveloped plots, one of which was under construction at the time of visiting the site. There is an access road to the site which is suitable to accommodate the eisting development and the residential development of the remaining 8 plots. The site adjoins the A484 at its south-western etremity and a smaller county road at the site s northern etremity. The site is encompassed by the eisting residential urban form. The main residential built-up area of Saron is located around the Trewern Housing estate and adjoining junction and etends in a south-easterly direction towards the candidate site. In this area of the settlement there is also a post office, a public house, a well-serviced bus stop and a chapel, in the southern part of the settlement there is a garage/petrol station and a primary school. The site adjoins the built-up area at the north of the settlement and development on the site would be well-related and integrated into the urban form and well placed between eisting service provision. There are no foreseeable issues with developing the site and the site has performed well in relation to the criteria set out in part 2b of the proforma. The development of the vacant plots would be a logical continuation of the eisting development and provides an opportunity for small-scale development of individual plots within the settlement. Taking into consideration the site s planning history and that the site is partly developed it is considered to be in the interests of certainty and clarity that the site remains allocated for residential use in the LDP. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: -42 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 4 2 Medium 1 1 High 5 10 Significant issues arise in relation to Climatic Factors, Cultural Heritage, Landscape and Population. Issues relating to cultural heritage and landscape arise as a result of the site s proimity to a Special Landscape Area and Historic Landscape Area. Issues relating to climatic factors are the result of availability of services and access to the road network and public transport services. Significant issues are noted under population as a result of the site s IMD ranking. Opportunities: Significant opportunities arise in relation to a number of sustainability themes, however, these opportunities arise in relation to the site s access to public transport and access to other services and facilities, and also as a result of the site s IMD ranking.

39 Further The issues and opportunities which arise in relation to the site are largely reflective of issues and opportunities which would affect the settlement as a whole. The site scores similarly to other sites assessed within the settlement and within the sustainable community. This is a reflection of the site s rural contet and the eisting scale of the settlement and the services it offers. There are no issues which arise in relation to the sustainability of the site which would justify ecluding the site from the development limits. Furthermore, as noted above, the site is located in close proimity to a number of key facilities and access to public transport.

40 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC2/h4 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Land adj. Arwynfa, Saron Site Area (Ha): 2.40ha Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Partly allocated for residential development (CL2/e) Relevant Planning History The site s frontage which adjoins the A484 road has been allocated for residential development in the Carmarthenshire Unitary Development Plan referenced CL2/e. W/19246 An application for two dwellings on the northern part of this site was submitted. The site lies within a 40mph speed limit and as such visibility splays of 2.4m 120m are required. The application was refused as the visibility to the north from the site s access point was restricted by the adjoining property- Arwynfa- and hedgerow which was not shown to be in the applicant s control. W/22031 application for outline consent for two plots at the southern part of site CL2/e withdrawn 22/12/ Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)

41 Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits) 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value

42 Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown The Carmarthenshire County Council Highways Division have noted that the following requirements would be made in relation to development on the site (provided on the basis of delivering approimately 49 dwellings): visibility required, 5.5 carriageway, 1.8 metre footways turning facilities. No issues or objections were noted in response to this site. The site in question is larger in area than the site submitted as part of application W/19246 and adjoins the A484 road for the whole of the field s road frontage and therefore it is possible to locate the vehicular access to the site further south at a point where suitable visibility splays are attained. The eisting UDP allocation, if developed, could potentially result in the proliferation of 5 access points along the site s road frontage. It is considered that the allocation of a larger site

43 with a single point of access would be better suited in terms of its impact upon the adjoining road. It is therefore considered appropriate to allocate a larger area for residential development which could feasibly develop one larger suitable point of access. It is considered that a suitable access point could be accommodated at the southern part of the site s frontage which could attain appropriate visibility splays. The required visibility splays would be reduced if the speed limit for the adjoining road was reduced to 30mph. There are no known biodiversity issues however, the Carmarthenshire County Council Planning Ecologist has noted that the presence of hedgerow on the site provides some biodiversity value. It has also been noted that there may be bats present on the site and therefore further investigation would be needed in support of any application in order to ascertain whether there are any bats present on site and, if appropriate, suitable mitigation measures are put in place prior to development. The Environment Agency (EA) has noted that the sewer catchment is currently thought to be at hydraulic capacity. There are ongoing discussions taking place with Dŵr Cymru Welsh Water (DCWW) and the EA in order to ascertain the hydraulic and biological capacity in the area and to ensure the deliverability of sites. It is considered that development on the site could be phased if it is necessary to improve capacity levels and to mitigate the impact of development. The details of phasing programmes shall be set out in a forthcoming phasing plan which shall strengthen the site s deliverability. Further to this, the EA has noted that improvements were carried out to intermittent discharges within the catchment under Asset Management Programme (AMP) 4 and that works are programmed to improve the parent discharge which serves the area under the AMP 5. The EA has also noted that SUDS should be implemented as part of any development on the site. This issue shall be dealt with under policy EP3 of the LDP which provides that there is a requirement to implement SUDS unless where it is justifiable not to do so. There is a Public Right of Way footpath which crosses the site along the largest field s northwestern boundary, however this could be incorporated into any potential development scheme and would not affect the site s deliverability but would potentially reduce the number of dwellings accommodated on the site. 6. Additional The site includes part of one large agricultural field and etends to the north-west across two smaller fields to the rear of the residential property of Trefechan and the south-eastern boundary of the ongoing residential development referenced as site SC2/h3. The larger field s road frontage adjoining the A484 road has been allocated for residential development as site CL2/e in the CUDP. The site s frontage is located between the residential properties of Arwynfa and Milestone. This residential built form defines the site s southern etremity and the site s western etremity at the point where it adjoins the road. The site s northern boundaries are adjacent to eisting urban residential form and are defined by the eisting boundaries at the rear of the adjoining properties gardens. The site s south-east side is defined by an eisting field boundary. There is no boundary or topographical feature which defines the site s north-east side. However, this boundary follows the north-eastern boundary of the adjoining field and is also in line with the rear boundary of the adjoining property of Bryn y Wawr. This boundary therefore represents a logical continuation of eisting boundaries and eisting urban form. The main residential built-up area of Saron is located around the Trewern Housing estate and adjoining junction and etends in a south-easterly direction towards the candidate site. In this area of the settlement there is also a post office, a public house, a well-serviced bus stop and a chapel,

44 in the southern part of the settlement there is a garage/petrol station and a primary school. The site adjoins the built-up area at the north of the settlement and development on the site would be well-related and integrated into the urban form and well placed between eisting service provision. The site measures 2.40ha in area and could potentially accommodate 48 units at 20 dwellings per hectare. However, the number of dwellings is likely to be restricted due to the site s irregular shape and proimity to eisting residential properties at the north-west of the site in order to retain the privacy and amenity of the adjoining properties. The number of dwellings on the site may also be reduced in order to retain the Public Rights of Way footpath which crosses the site. Furthermore, taking into account the eisting low density and character of development in the settlement the number of dwellings may be further reduced. It is therefore estimated that the site would be more likely to accommodate some 35 dwellings. As noted above, the site was partly allocated for residential development in the UDP (CL2/e). Allocating the whole of this candidate site is considered to provide three significant improvements to the UDP allocated site. Namely, that development on site SC2h4 could be catered for by a single point of access while the UDP allocation would potentially result in the creation of some 5 access points adjoining the road. Secondly, the development of the UDP allocation CL2/e could significantly restrict the potential for future development to take place to the north-east of the site by limiting access to this part of land. Thirdly, development of site CL2/e would result in further ribbon pattern development along the A484 road which would be contrary to the provisions of PPW paragraph It is considered that development on the site would integrate well with the eisting built form and service provision. Development on the site is considered to be a logical etension of the urban form and is considered to be a suitable candidate for residential development. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: -41 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 3 2 Medium 1 1 High 5 10 Significant issues arise in relation to Climatic Factors, Cultural Heritage, Landscape and Population. Issues relating to cultural heritage and landscape arise as a result of the site s proimity to a Special Landscape Area and Historic Landscape Area thus significantly reducing the site s score. These issues arise as a result of the site s rural contet and appropriate residential development could still take place in this area. Issues relating to climatic factors are the result of availability of services and access to the road network and public transport services. Issues are noted under population as a result of the site s IMD ranking. Opportunities: Significant opportunities arise in relation to a number of sustainability themes, however, these opportunities arise in relation to the site s access to public transport and access to other services and facilities, and also as a result of the site s IMD ranking. Further The issues and opportunities which arise in relation to the site are largely reflective of issues and opportunities which would affect the settlement as a whole. The site scores similarly to other sites assessed within the settlement and within the sustainable community. This is a reflection of the site s rural contet and the

45 eisting scale of the settlement and the services it offers. There are no issues which arise in relation to the sustainability of the site which would justify ecluding the site from the development limits.

46 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: CS0696 Site Ref (where applicable): SC3/h1 Location: Land to the rear of Ysgol Bro Brynach Site Area (Ha): 1.4ha Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? No Relevant Planning History The site has no relevant planning history 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

47 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The eisting housing allocation within the UDP for Llanboidy is characterised by a Grade II Listed Building which was meant to be delivered as a conversion potential. It is considered that this conversion, due to cost and potential development constraints would not be delivered during the LDP period and therefore has been omitted from the Deposit LDP. Llanboidy has therefore not had any developments of significance taking place within the last 10 years. Given the location of the village as a local centre for other smaller communities within the area, the village has a substantial number of facilities, including a new school, community hall, recreational pitches, Public House, Local shop and a place of Worship. It is therefore felt that a new site is required within the village

48 The parcel of land in question relates to part of candidate site , which is represented by an agricultural field to the west (rear of) Ysgol Bro Brynach, Llanboidy. An access to the site consists of an agricultural track which runs east west and to the south of the old school building which is still in use. This site at Llanboidy provides a unique opportunity within what is a heavily constrained village. Lower Llanboidy is affected by the C2 flood zone and the Scheduled Ancient Monument, and the northern half of Llanboidy is affected by the Conservation area, alongside the topography and linear urban form. The piece of land rises from south to north behind the eisting urban form, and based on its 1.4 hectares in size, it is felt that 20 dwellings would be appropriate for a rural village. It would be considered necessary to phase the development to integrate the site into the village. One of the key aspects on the delivery of this site would be the access point to the site, and this would need to be considered in detail during a planning application stage. In conclusion, Llanboidy requires a new residential site to support the rural economy and social fabric of the community. A new residential site at this location offers the best potential for development, particularly as a balance between the local environment, and the community needs. If this cannot be made during the early years of the Plan, then the monitoring and review process within the LDP could come into effect. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown

49 Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 31 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 16 1 Medium 0 2 High 3 7 See Scorecard Opportunities: See Scorecard Further The site has a number of low issues due to the location of historic and cultural assets within the village.

50 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: CL4/c Site Ref (where applicable): CL4/c SC4/h1 Location: Land to the rear of Maesglas. Site Area (Ha): 0.75 ha Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Yes Relevant Planning History W/14604 Residential Development of 8-10 dwellings Outline planning pending subject to S106 agreements. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

51 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The site consists of an agricultural field which is a housing allocation within the UDP. The site has defensible boundaries and is set just off the A478. The site is located within the urban form of Glandy Cross and would not have an adverse impact on the character of the settlement or to the general amenity of any neighbouring properties. The site was put forward to the Technical Officer Group for consideration. The EA state that the area lies outside the catchment of the public sewer system and they would highlight concerns regarding the proliferation of small private disposal facilities. Any private facilities will require either a permit or eemption from the EA. It is noted however that the EA have not objected to the inclusion of the site. Further comments are also provided.

52 The Planning Ecologist has offered no objection to the site. CCW have not responded on the application. The Highways Authority has offered no objection. The site has been granted outline planning permission for residential development subject to S106 agreements. It is considered that the site would be brought forward within the LDP period. It is envisaged that 10 dwellings could be built on this site. This site would allow an opportunity to provide a sustainable pattern of growth to sustain the services within the village. The site has been through the SA process, details of which are highlighted below. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths

53 Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: -52 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 3 1 Medium 2 2 High 5 9 Historic Landscape Features adjacent to site 1 Schedule Ancient Monument within 100m of site 5 Scheduled Ancient Monument within 500m of site Low number of high frequency buses through the settlement Opportunities: Increases the social fabric of the settlement See scorecard for detailed comments Located along the trunk road. Further The site scores low due to the Historic Landscape features and SAMs in the area. This site however is located within the centre of the settlement, thus contributing to the community and social fabric.

54 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC4/h2 Site Ref (where applicable): SC4/h2 Location: Land at Cross Roads. Site Area (Ha): 0.45 ha Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Yes Relevant Planning History W/ dormer bungalow Reserved Matters Approved 20/09/2007 W/21911 Three bedroom house Full permission approved 11/12/2009 W/06414 Outline permission for bungalow and dwellings - Approved 02/06/ Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?

55 Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits) 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The site consists of an agricultural field which is a housing allocation within the UDP. The site is located within the urban form of Glandy Cross and would not have an adverse impact on the character of the settlement or to the general amenity of any neighbouring properties. The settlement is characterised by a linear form along the A478, and therefore the site would provide an infill of 6 dwellings along this stretch of road. Parts of the site have already been completed and others have full planning permission. As a result the site would not have an adverse impact on highway safety. Whilst the site was not taken to the Technical Officers Group the EA state that Glandy Cross lies outside the catchment of the public sewer system and they would highlight concerns regarding the

56 proliferation of small private disposal facilities. Any private facilities will require either a permit or eemption from the EA. It is noted however that the EA have not objected to the inclusion of the site. Further comments are also provided. It is considered that the site would be brought forward within the short term, and therefore aid in the delivery of housing provisions within the LDP. This site would allow an opportunity to provide a sustainable pattern of growth to sustain the services within the village. The site has been through the SA process, details of which are highlighted below. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown

57 Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: -152 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 3 1 Medium 2 2 High 6 9 Historic Landscape Features adjacent to site 1 Schedule Ancient Monument within 100m of site 5 Scheduled Ancient Monument within 500m of site Low number of high frequency buses through the settlement Opportunities: Increases the social fabric of the settlement See scorecard for detailed comments Located along the trunk road. Further The site scores low due to the Historic Landscape features and SAMs in the area. This site however is located within the centre of the settlement, thus contributing to the community and social fabric.

58 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: CL4/a Site Ref (where applicable): SC4/h3 Location: Rear of Hafod Wen Site Area (Ha): 0.64 ha Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Yes CL4/a Relevant Planning History There is no relevant planning history 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

59 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The parcel of land set within the centre of the settlement is an eisting UDP housing allocation which has no planning permission. The agricultural land is flat and conducive to development with three sides having dwellings or a road on the periphery of the site. It is also within close proimity to the services within the village. The Head of Transport has responded as part of the Technical Officer Group and identified that the site has inadequate footways and carriageway widths. It is considered that the site has a number of potential access points available to cater for the new dwellings and highway improvements could be made in conjunction with any new developments. The Planning Ecologist has not identified any issues with this site, and only makes reference to the fact that there are hedgerows on the site.

60 The Countryside Council for Wales has no objection to the site. Dyfed Archaeological Trust has noted the site falls within Category B, with the site on the line of a Roman Road, with the condition of this road unknown. It is felt that a detailed assessment at a planning application stage would be able to consider if the development would have an adverse impact on this Roman Road. The Environment Agency state that the area lies outside the catchment of the public sewer system and would highlight concerns over the proliferation of small private disposal facilities. Any private facilities would require either a permit or eemption from the Environment Agency. Dwr Cymru Welsh Water have not objected to this allocation. In conclusion this site provides a better location for development than others considered within Efailwen. Based on its size and shape, and the consideration of an access within the site it is felt that 8 dwellings could be developed on this site. The site went through the SA process, the summary of which is listed at the end of this pro forma. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport

61 Cycle ways and/or footpaths No Yes Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: -24 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 6 2 Medium 1 1 High 5 12 Landscape Features adjacent to site 1 (Historic Landscape Area) Please see scorecard for breakdown of other issues Opportunities: See scorecard for breakdown. There are a number of high prospective opportunities gained from this site. Further Low score is due to Landscape features within the area. Significant prospective opportunities within the site given its location within the centre of the village.

62 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: ACS Site Ref (where applicable): SC4/h4 Location: Beca Bakery, Efailwen Site Area (Ha): 0.69 ha Eisting Use* Vacant and Residential Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? No Relevant Planning History W/10684 One dwelling Full Planning Permission 07/09/2005 W/16532 One dwelling Full Planning Permission 11/12/2007 W/14341 One bungalow Reserved Matters Granted 05/01/2007 W/09642 Housing Development Outline Granted 23/06/ Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

63 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The parcel of land set within the centre of the settlement is within development limits and has various planning permissions. The vacant land forms as part of the former Beca Bakery. The land is flat and conducive to development with satisfactory access points onto the main roads. For these reasons, the site is to be put forward as an LDP allocation. The site has been through the Technical Officers Group. The Head of Transport has no observations to make on the allocation. The Planning Ecologist has not identified any issues with this site, and only makes reference to the fact that there are hedgerows on the site, and the potential requirement of bat surveys

64 The Countryside Council for Wales has not objection to the site. Dyfed Archaeological Trust has noted the site falls within Category C, with the site being within significant prehistoric landscape. The Environment Agency state that the area lies outside the catchment of the public sewer system and would highlight concerns over the proliferation of small private disposal facilities. Any private facilities would require either a permit or eemption from the Environment Agency. Dwr Cymru Welsh Water however, has not objected to this allocation. The Housing Land Availability Study indicates that the Beca Bakery site had 4 dwellings remaining within the planning permission. There is also an area on the north-eastern side which is vacant and without planning permission. This land equates to 0.32 hectares and based on eisting densities a further 5 dwellings could be developed bringing the site up to 9 dwellings in total within the LDP time period. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths

65 Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: -36 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 3 2 Medium 1 2 High 5 10 Landscape Features adjacent to site 1 (Historic Landscape Area) and 1 Special Landscape Area. See breakdown of scorecard for issues Opportunities: Significant prospective opportunities within the site given its location within the centre of the village. See scorecard for details Further Low score is due to the weighting of scoring for Landscape features within the area.

66 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: CS0462 (part) Site Ref (where applicable): (part) ; SC7/h1 Location: Adj Pleasant View, Capel Iwan Site Area (Ha): Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Allocated for housing development (CL7b) Relevant Planning History none 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

67 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

68 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional Capel Iwan is identified in the Deposit LDP as a stand alone settlement within a sustainable community (SC). The LDP seeks to direct land allocations to the most sustainable settlements, i.e. those which have a presence of a key service or facility The Carmarthenshire Unitary Development Plan allocated two sites, one of which ( Adjacent Afallon ) is now complete. No planning permission eists on this, the remaining site, Adjacent Pleasant View. The site is located in the middle of the village of Capel Iwan to the south of the eastern road running through the village. The site is currently used as agricultural land and has a high hedgerow adjoining the road. The site was, and still is considered as a suitable site for frontage plots leading

69 onto the main Capel Iwan road, to reflect the pattern developed opposite the site. The site should therefore be allocated for residential development with a capacity of 7 dwellings (20 dwellings per hectare). 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 38 Score Summary Count Issues - Opportunities: - Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Further Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. 8. Technical Officer Group Dyfed Archaeological Trust Category E - This site can be allocated in the LDP as it is unlikely that historic environment interests will be adversely affected by a development proposal. Highways Environment Agency No comments made. Biodiversity & Fisheries: No known issues Pollution Prevention: There are currently no significant water body issues. However, your Authority must ensure that this development will not cause deterioration of the water environment thus impacting on the Water Framework Directive classification. In addition we recommend consultation with DCWW to ensure that there is adequate hydraulic and biological capacity with the pumping station to serve this level of growth. Flood Risk: No issues. SuDS. Groundwater & Contaminated Land: No known issues Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

70 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: CS1015 Site Ref (where applicable): ; SC7/h2 Location: Land rear of Brynhyfryd, Capel Iwan Site Area (Ha): 0.68 Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Site located outside development limits, in open countryside. Relevant Planning History W/06647 Outline planning permission refused Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

71 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

72 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional Capel Iwan is identified in the Deposit LDP as a stand alone settlement within a sustainable community (SC). The LDP seeks to direct land allocations to the most sustainable settlements, i.e. those which have a presence of a key service or facility (namely: Post Office, local shop, primary school and community/public hall). The presence of a key service or facility within a settlement is a significant consideration in identifying the appropriateness of a given settlement to accommodate market housing allocations (five plus site). When settlements were assessed as part of the LDP Strategy, Capel Iwan was been identified as offering potential for market allocations as it contained three of the identified key facilities including a primary school, community hall and a Post Office. Since the settlement assessment was undertaken, the Post Office and primary school has since closed, the community hall remains open. For these reasons, Capel Iwan was considered an appropriate settlement to accommodate market housing allocations. The Carmarthenshire Unitary Development Plan allocated two sites, one of which ( Adjacent Afallon ) is now complete. No planning permission eists on the remaining site, Adjacent Pleasant View. The site is located in the middle of the village of Capel Iwan and is situated to the rear of a number of two storey properties to the south of Capel Iwan Chapel. These properties are located on the eastern flank of the main road through the village of Capel Iwan. The site is flat and is laid to grass

73 and an access has already been created. Planning permission was refused in 2006 for residential development on the site, the main reason being that the site was, at that time located outside the development limits. The Highways Section have been consulted and have reported that there may be inadequate visibility to the east of the site. Following further discussions with highways, they have commented that the visibility splay of 27m is, according to TAN 18 and MfS, acceptable for a new development access where actual traffic speeds are some 21mph 85th percentile. If the speeds can be traffic managed, or confirmed to be 85th percentile wet weather speeds of 21mph then the development may be permitted. A detailed investigation of the access to the site would be properly conducted at the planning application stage. The site is central to the village amenities and would round off the settlement at this location. It is also considered, along with the site known as Adjacent Pleasant View, to be the most suitable site in the village for market housing. The site should therefore be allocated for residential development with a capacity of 13 dwellings (20 dwellings per hectare). 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 70 Score Summary Count Issues - Opportunities: - Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Further Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. 8. Technical Officer Group Dyfed Archaeological Trust Category E - This site can be allocated in the LDP as it is unlikely that historic environment interests will be adversely affected by a development proposal. Highways Environment Agency Inadequate visibility at 27m uphill to the East. (see Section 6 above for a further eplanation) Biodiversity & Fisheries: No known issues Pollution Prevention: There are currently no significant water body issues. However, your Authority must ensure that this development will not cause deterioration of the water environment thus impacting on the Water Framework Directive classification. In addition we recommend consultation with DCWW to ensure that there is adequate hydraulic and biological capacity with the pumping station to serve this level of growth. Flood Risk: No issues. SuDS. Groundwater & Contaminated Land: No known issues Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

74 1. Site Details Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma Ref: CL8/b Site Ref (where applicable): SC8/h1 Location: Adjacent to Picton House Site Area (Ha): 0.8 ha Eisting Use* Vacant Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Yes Relevant Planning History W/ No dwellings and access road Full Refused 01/04/11 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

75 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The site consists of a parcel of vacant land on the south western side of Trelech, with the site having its road access being constructed. The site rises from east to west. A recent application which was pending for sometime was recently refused for the following reasons. In that the proposal would have a detrimental impact on the capacity of the Sewage Treatment Works as the construction of eight dwellings on the application site would overload the Waste Water Treatment Works. There were no improvements planned within Welsh Water's Capital Investment Programme and that any development prior to improvements being made would be premature. The use of a private drainage system is not considered acceptable as there is no deadline set in the current AMP programme for the improvements required to the public system. Therefore any temporary private drainage system has the potential to become permanent.

76 Trelech suffers from mains water low pressure and currently there are no improvements schedules in the current 5 year AMP. There are also known problems within the public sewerage network serving this settlement. For these reasons, it would mean that the delivery of this site would be late in the Plan period unless the developer would wish to proceed, by going through the water requisitions provisions of the Water Industry Act Nevertheless, the LDP must identify land that would be available for development. In terms of assisting the economic and social fabric of Trelech, the site in question provides suitable land for development. In this respect, it provides one of few options in the village and for that reason it is allocated for residential use. In conclusion the site has being given a very low density due to water and sewerage issues; topography of the site, and its integration within the village. It is considered that 6 dwellings would be considered acceptable on the site. The site has been through the SA process, the summary of which is detailed at the end of the pro forma. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport

77 Cycle ways and/or footpaths No Yes Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown Low water pressure issues and Trelech was not identified for improvement schedules in the current 5 year AMP Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 147 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 3 0 Medium 1 1 High 3 18 See Scorecard Opportunities: See Scorecard Further There are a significant number of high prospective opportunities

78 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: CL8/a Site Ref (where applicable): SC8/h2 Location: Land adjacent to Tower Hill Site Area (Ha): 0.59 ha Eisting Use* Vacant and partly residential Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Yes Relevant Planning History W/ PROPOSED PAIR OF LINK - DETACHED DORMER BUNGALOWS Full Refused 06/06/2007 W/ PROPOSED ERECTION OF SINGLE DWELLING Full Refused 05/06/07 W/ PROPOSED ERECTION OF SINGLE DWELLING Outline Refused 06/06/ Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)

79 Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits) 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The site consists of a parcel of vacant land on the eastern side of Trelech, with the site having its road access being constructed. Recent applications within the site have been refused due to infrastructural issues. Trelech suffers from mains water low pressure and currently there are no improvements schedules in the current 5 year AMP. There are also known problems within the public sewerage network

80 serving this settlement. For these reasons, it would mean that the delivery of this site would be late in the Plan period unless the developer would wish to proceed, by going through the water requisitions provisions of the Water Industry Act Nevertheless, the LDP must identify land that would be available for development. In terms of assisting the economic and social fabric of Trelech, the site in question provides suitable land for development. In this respect, it provides one of few options in the village and for that reason it is allocated for residential use. In conclusion the site would be developed as single plot developments, characterised by the recent planning history on the site. Given the area of land remaining, the settlement s water and sewerage issues; topography of the site, and its integration within the village, it is considered that 5 dwellings would be acceptable on the site. The site has been through the SA process, the summary of which is detailed at the end of the pro forma. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths

81 Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown Low water pressure issues and Trelech was not identified for improvement schedules in the current 5 year AMP. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 124 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 1 0 Medium 0 1 High 3 15 See Scorecard Opportunities: See Scorecard Further There are a significant number of high prospective opportunities

82 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC9/h1 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Adjacent Fron heulog Site Area (Ha): Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Allocated for residential use (CL9b) Relevant Planning History W/20990 Full planning permission for 4 dwellings granted 16/10/09 on part of the site W/17114 Outline planning permission on the whole site granted 26/2/08 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

83 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

84 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site consists of a field located some 170m to the north of the junction between the A484 and the B4333. To the south of the site is a small cul-de-sac of bungalows known as Fronheulog. To the north of the site are further dwellings which front onto the main road. The site slopes steeply from north to south and gently from east to west. Outline planning permission eists on the whole site, and full permission on part for 4 dwellings. Work has commenced on the site to implement the latter permission. The site has planning permission and it is an acceptable site, therefore it is proposed to continue the site s allocation in the Local Development Plan for 10 dwellings. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 88 Score Summary Count Issues - Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities

85 Opportunities: - Further Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. 8. Technical Officer Group Dyfed Archaeological Trust Category E - This site can be allocated in the LDP as it is unlikely that historic environment interests will be adversely affected by a development proposal. Highways No observations (Planning permission eists for this site) Environment Agency Biodiversity & Fisheries: No known issues. Pollution Prevention: There are currently no significant water body issues. However, your Authority must ensure that this development will not cause deterioration of the water environment thus impacting on the Water Framework Directive classification. In addition we recommend consultation with DCWW to ensure that there is adequate hydraulic and biological capacity with the pumping station to serve this level of growth. Flood Risk: The proposed allocation lies partially within zone C2, as defined by the development advice maps referred to under TAN 15 Development and Flood Risk (July 2004). In accordance with TAN15, residential developments and emergency services are regarded as highly vulnerable and should not be permitted within zone C2. We would advise that the site allocation boundary is amended to eclude the flood risk area (including the access & egress) as the current allocation would be contrary to National Policy and could potentially make the plan unsound Groundwater & Contaminated Land: No known issues. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

86 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC9/h2 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Land Adjacent Lleine, Cynwyl Elfed Site Area (Ha): Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Allocated for residential use (CL9d) Relevant Planning History W/20633 Full planning permission granted subject to S106 W/20325 Full planning permission granted for 1 dwelling 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

87 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

88 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site consists of a sloping field located at the eastern flank of the B4333 Cynwyl Elfed to Hermon road, approimately 100 metres north of its junction with the A484. The site represents the total frontage of the field onto the B4333 between the farm comple at Lleine and Dolarwel, a bungalow to the north. The site rises considerably from south to north and is approimately 2 metres above the road level and is put to grass at the present time. Full planning permission has been granted on the site for 13 dwellings, subject to the applicant signing a Section 106 agreement on the site, which has not yet been done. One dwelling has been completed on the northern part of the site. Due to the above, and that it is an acceptable site, it is proposed to continue the site s allocation in the Local Development Plan for 15 dwellings. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 88 Score Summary Count Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities

89 Issues - Opportunities: - Further Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. 8. Technical Officer Group Dyfed Archaeological Trust Category E - This site can be allocated in the LDP as it is unlikely that historic environment interests will be adversely affected by a development proposal. Highways No observations (Planning permission eists for this site) Environment Agency Biodiversity & Fisheries: No known issues. Pollution Prevention: There are currently no significant water body issues. However, your Authority must ensure that this development will not cause deterioration of the water environment thus impacting on the Water Framework Directive classification. In addition we recommend consultation with DCWW to ensure that there is adequate hydraulic and biological capacity with the pumping station to serve this level of growth. Flood Risk: No issues. However, please note that our flood map information at that location is not very accurate as the Nant Gochen that runs in close proimity to the site is classed as an ordinary watercourse. SuDS. Groundwater & Contaminated Land: No known issues. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

90 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC9/h3 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Adjacent Dolwerdd, Cynwyl Elfed Site Area (Ha): Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Allocated for residential use (CL9c) Relevant Planning History None. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

91 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

92 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site consists of a gently sloping grassed field located on the southern side of the A484 on the edge of Cynwyl Elfed. The site slopes gradually down towards the River Duad. The site is flanked by two residential properties along the A484. The site is allocated for residential development in the Carmarthenshire Local Development Plan, and part of the site was included in the development limits of the Carmarthen District Local Plan (adopted 1999). No development has taken place on the site to date. It is considered that the site, as allocated, is close to the C2 Flood Risk Zone, but is outside, therefore the site cannot be considered at risk of flooding. It is considered that the site is an appropriate allocation and should remain to be allocated in the Local Development Plan for 6 dwellings.

93 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 61 Score Summary Count Issues - Opportunities: - Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Further Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. 8. Technical Officer Group Dyfed Archaeological Trust Category E - This site can be allocated in the LDP as it is unlikely that historic environment interests will be adversely affected by a development proposal. Highways No comments received Environment Agency Biodiversity & Fisheries: No known issues. Pollution Prevention: There are currently no significant water body issues. However, your Authority must ensure that this development will not cause deterioration of the water environment thus impacting on the Water Framework Directive classification. In addition we recommend consultation with DCWW to ensure that there is adequate hydraulic and biological capacity with the pumping station to serve this level of growth. Flood Risk: The proposed allocation lies partially within zone C2, as defined by the development advice maps referred to under TAN 15 Development and Flood Risk (July 2004). In accordance with TAN15, residential developments and emergency services are regarded as highly vulnerable and should not be permitted within zone C2. We would advise that the site allocation boundary is amended to eclude the flood risk area (including the access & egress) as the current allocation would be contrary to National Policy and could potentially make the plan unsound Groundwater & Contaminated Land: No known issues. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

94 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC11/h1 Site Ref (where applicable): SC11/h1 Location: O.S 8671, r/o Irfonan Site Area (Ha): 0.85ha Eisting Use* Vacant / Residential Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? CL11/b Relevant Planning History W/16081 Housing Development Phase 2. Full Granted 24/04/ Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

95 Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The site in question relates to an eisting UDP site within Llangynin. An access road to the site has already been completed which is used for the eisting properties which have been developed on the southern part of the site. The make up of the northern part of the UDP site is characterised in two ways. Firstly there is a well kept grassed area, and is fenced off, and the most western part of the site includes an area of vacant / unused land. In respect to the allocation of this land it is considered that a development of approimately 10 dwellings could be accommodated comfortably into the site and represents a similar density to dwellings seen within this part of Llangynin.

96 In order to sustain the services and facilities within Llangynin, it is considered that this site provides the best potential for new residential development within the village, and given the previous permissions and completed dwellings on part of the site, the site is brought forward during the LDP period. The site was put through the SA process, details of which are highlighted below. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

97 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 60 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 4 3 Medium 0 0 High 3 9 See scorecard for issues Opportunities: See scorecard for opportunities Further

98 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: CL11/a Site Ref (where applicable): SC11/h2 Location: Land off Drefach Road, Meidrim Site Area (Ha): 1.6 ha Eisting Use* Vacant and partly residential Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Yes Relevant Planning History W/ ACCESS ROAD TO PROPOSED PLOTS AND PROPOSED PLOT LAYOUTS Reserved matter Refused 04/01/2008 W/ ACCESS ROAD TO PROPOSED PLOTS AND PROPOSED PLOT LAYOUTS Reserved matters Approved 03/06/2008 Planning Applications for single plots have been approved on the site between 2008 and Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed)

99 Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits) 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The parcel of land in question is located in the eastern periphery of Meidrim village with access off a minor road leading from the centre of Meidrim to Glandwr. The access to the site is a steep estate road with footways, which is currently used for eight residential properties.

100 The site has planning history with outline permission for 12 dwellings, with 2 of those being affordable dwellings. It also has reserved matters permission for a road and plot layout. There have been a number of applications for dwellings within the site, which are coming in as self build developments, and piecemeal developments. Therefore there would be no requirement for phasing on the site. In conclusion, given the planning history on the site, and the likelihood of delivery within the short medium term of the LDP period, this site will be brought forward as an allocation. The site was put through the SA process, the summary of which is at the bottom of this pro forma. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown

101 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 80 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 2 7 Medium 0 1 High 3 10 See scorecard for further comments Opportunities: See scorecard for further comments Further The site has a significant number of prospective opportunities

102 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: Site Ref (where applicable): SC11/h3 Location: Land adjacent and the r/o Lon Dewi Site Area (Ha): 0.9ha Eisting Use* Agricultural Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? No Relevant Planning History No relevant planning history 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

103 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The parcel of land in question is located in the eastern periphery of Meidrim village and directly off Lon Dewi. Access to the site would be via an agricultural access with the majority of the allocation being on a higher level than the road. The site has no planning history and would be a new allocation. The site has been through the Technical Officer Group. Dyfed Archaeological Trust indicates that the site falls within Category D of their assessment. The Head of Transport requires a visibility splay to be created and a speed survey to reduce MFS. Environment Agency identify that there are currently no significant water body issues, and no known issues with flood risk.

104 DCWW have not commented on the site. The Planning Ecologist offers no comment and CCW offer no objection to the site. This site provides one of few opportunities for development within Meidrim. Along with the planning permission at Land off Drefach Road, the development of 10 houses within this site would allow sufficient development during the LDP period to sustain both the economic and social fabric of the community. The site would have no adverse impact on neighbouring properties, and also allow integration into its semi-rural setting, without being detrimental to its current character. The site was put through the SA process, the summary of which is at the bottom of this pro forma. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown

105 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 100 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 4 4 Medium 0 4 High 3 11 See scorecard for further comments Opportunities: See scorecard for further comments Further The site has a significant number of prospective opportunities

106 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: ACS Site Ref (where applicable): SC13/h1 Location: Land at Nieuport Farm, Pendine Site Area (Ha): 0.28 ha Eisting Use* Former agricultural Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? No. Relevant Planning History W/ Residential development (number of units to be determined) as amended by W/16626 & W/20590 Reserved Matters Granted 11/01/2010 W/ Variation of condition 9 of planning permission w/07003 (as amended by W/16626) VOC granted 30/03/2009 W/ Variation of condition 2 of planning permission W/07003 in order to etend the period for the application for approval of reserved matters by a further 24 months VOC granted 22/08/ Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)

107 Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits) 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The site in question relates to former agricultural land and associated buildings to the north of Pendine.

108 The site has been granted a reserved matters application for the principle of development on the site for 5 dwellings, and therefore all considerations which would have been requested of the Technical Officer Group has been accepted. For this reason, the site is likely to come forward within the short medium term and for these reasons the site can be put forward as a housing allocation within the LDP. The site has been through the SA process, a summary of which can be found at the end of the pro forma. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown

109 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 63 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 5 3 Medium 3 2 High 3 10 See scorecard for further comments Opportunities: See scorecard for further comments Further The site has a significant number of high prospective opportunities

110 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: CL13/b Site Ref (where applicable): SC13/h2 Location: Oceans View, Pendine Site Area (Ha): 0.9 ha Eisting Use* Partly Residential and Vacant Potential Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Residential 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Yes Relevant Planning History There are a number of planning permissions throughout the site which are for single plots 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

111 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The site currently forms as the eisting UDP housing allocation on Pendine Hill, with the site now known as Ocean View. It initially had an indicative number of 11 dwellings and at the time of writing, five dwellings had been built, a further three have planning permission and another three have had permissions that have now epired, unless it can be proven that a technical start has been made in order to retain the permission in perpetuity. The JHLAS 2007 indicates that 5 were built before the LDP period. In looking at the plot sizes and the topography of the site, it is felt that an indicative of 5 no dwellings would be sufficient on the site. Given the planning history on the site and the location of the site within the village, it is considered that these dwellings would be built within the short medium term. For these reasons, the site was not taken to the Technical Officer Group.

112 The site has been through the SA process, a summary of which is detailed below. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown

113 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 54 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 4 3 Medium 2 1 High 4 10 See scorecard for further breakdown. Opportunities: See scorecard for further comments Further The site has a significant number of high prospective opportunities

114 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: PDB41 ACS Location: Land at Woodend Site Ref (where applicable): SC13/h3 Site Area (Ha): 2.1 ha Eisting Use* Former MOD Land - Vacant Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Yes PDB41 Relevant Planning History W/ RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT - 25% LIVE WORK AND 15% AFFORDABLE HOUSING AT FORMER MOD LAND Outline Pending W/ RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT - 25% LIVE WORK AND 15% AFFORDABLE HOUSING Outline Granted 03/07/ Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed)

115 Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits) 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The site is roughly rectangular and measures approimately 2.1 hectares (5.3 acres) which gently rises up from the road. The site would be accessed from the A4066 St. Clears to Pendine coastal road which is directly parallel. Adjacent are eisting residential developments to the west and Wood End, while to the north it further adjoins three residential dwellings known as Llanmiloe Fach. The site was formerly used by the Ministry of Defence and has several derelict buildings associated with the camp as shower blocks, water tower and boiler house. The former

116 accommodation blocks on site are now demolished. The land surrounding these empty buildings is mainly overgrown grass and vegetation with small pockets of trees in places. The site has been through the SA process, the summary of which is highlighted below. The site scores etremely low, and this is in combination of a number of landscape and biodiversity factors which are adjacent to the site and in the area in general. Given the scoring system, it heavily skews the score to the negative. There are however a number of high prospective opportunities from the site in respect of population, social fabric, health and wellbeing SA objectives. As mentioned in the planning history, this site has been granted an outline planning permission for the development of residential development subject to the allocation of 25% live/work dwellings and 15% affordable units. No detail has been submitted relating to the reserved matters. The outline permission runs until July A further outline planning application has been submitted which is pending and based on the principle of development having been granted, it is considered that this site will come forward for development within the short medium term of the LDP. Based on the size of the site, it is envisaged that 40 dwellings could be accommodated. NB: Update 10/05/13. Reference should be made to the Council s schedule of focused changes which has direct implications for this Deposit LDP allocation. Particular regard should be given to the Council s response to Deposit LDP representation reference D6142 (flood risk). In this respect a focused change is considered for the area within the housing allocation. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown

117 Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: -352 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 3 1 Medium 5 1 High 8 11 Landscape features adjacent to the site. (1 Historic Landscape Area; 1 Special Landscape Area) Ancient Woodland within 100m of the site Unnamed Ancient Semi Natural Woodland adjacent to the site See scorecard for further breakdown. Opportunities: See scorecard for further comments Further The site has a significant number of high prospective opportunities

118 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC14/h1 Site Ref (where applicable): SC14/h1 Location: Land adjacent to Avola Farm, Site Area (Ha): 0.6 ha Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Yes - CL13/c Relevant Planning History No planning history 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

119 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The candidate site, which is in agricultural use, is on the northern end of Red Roses and within the settlement limits of the village. The site is the eisting housing allocation CL13/c, however this has not been developed at present. It forms an irregular shape surrounding Avola Farm and the Community Hall. The site has defined natural boundaries and as it relates to the eisting urban form of the settlement, it would integrate into the urban form of the village

120 The site was put through to the Technical Officer Group and three responses have been received. The EA identify no issues with the allocation of this site The Head of Transport have identified a requirement of a visibility splay which crosses 3 rd party land and also a restricted forward visibility. In response to the Head of Transport s comment, there are two potential access points into the site, and therefore a suitable and safe access arrangement could be achieved. This however would need to be detailed at a planning application stage. No objection has been received from the Countryside Council for Wales. No response has been received from Dwr Cymru Welsh Water, Dyfed Archaeological Trust, Planning Ecologist or from the In reflection on the housing apportionment within the village of Red Roses it is considered that there is a requirement for some development to maintain and enhance the local services, and through the development of this site, it is felt that it could achieve that objective. It is also the only potential site for a respectable and integrated development within Red Roses. It is considered that the site would be able to accommodate 10 dwellings, which is considered acceptable for Red Roses within the Plan period. The site has been through the SA process, the summary of which can be found at the bottom of this pro forma. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown

121 Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. No known constraints. Yes No Unknown 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 106 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 2 3 Medium 1 2 High 4 14 Main issues involve the SA objective on Population and Climatic Factors. Please see scorecard for breakdown Opportunities: Significant number of high prospective opportunities Further

122 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: CS0341 CS0513 CS0633 CS0952 Site Ref (where applicable): SC15/h Location: Maes Cowin, Bancyfelin Site Area (Ha): 4.46 ha Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Partly Relevant Planning History W/15162 Erection of 18 houses with associated infrastructure Full Refused 11/05/2007 This application involved the demolition of a dwelling on the eastern side of the village and a road infrastructure which went through the candidate site. This road network linked to the eisting UDP housing allocation CL14/a. W/ Outline for residential development (with affordable housing), school parking/drop off area and public play area (outline permission granted subject to S106 agreement) 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)

123 Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits) 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value

124 Numerous candidate sites have been submitted included a parcel of land set on the northern end of the settlement and etends to the southern boundary of the railway line. The site slopes considerably up from a south to north direction, with significant vantage points to the south, and which also offers significant long views towards the village. Within the UDP Inspector report, consideration was given to the location of Bancyfelin in relation to the larger settlements and the fact that an influ of new dwellings would result in a greater dependence on the private vehicle. It is considered however that a moderate level of new development is required to sustain local services within the village. Any proposed development would be able to utilise the eisting access point, which currently serves Cae Ffynnon. Given the awkward shaped area to the rear of the primary school, it is considered that development would be better located on the western edge to allow the integration with the eisting built form. The candidate sites were taken to the Technical Officer Group for consideration and the Environment Agency placed a blanket objection to development in Bancyfelin. They state that the settlement is served by Bancyfelin WWTW which discharges to the Cywyn. This stretch is currently failing to meet Water Framework Directive standards for Anne 8, Diatoms and Fish based on 2009/2010 data. This development would have the potential to increase the nutrient loading in the catchment which is likely to cause further deterioration. As a precautionary approach the EA object to the submission. Further to the submission of the sites to TOG, an application has been submitted on a large part of the candidate sites, and the EA have not objected to this application. Given the discrepancy in the responses and no objections being forthcoming, the site which this application refers to will be allocated. There are no objections to the site from any other members of the Technical Officer Group. This site provides one of very few opportunities for development within Bancyfelin and given the eisting planning status of the site, it is considered that the development will come forward during the medium term of the LDP period. A part of the site has been developed and is now known as Cae Ffynnon. 3 dwellings were built before April 1 st 2007 as defined in the JHLAS, and therefore 6 were remaining during the LDP period. Based on the proposed application for 17 dwellings under W/24182, it is considered that its density is acceptable for the settlement of Bancyfelin, and therefore 23 dwellings are allocated for this site during the LDP period. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

125 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 31 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 16 1 Medium 0 2 High 3 7 See Scorecard Opportunities: See Scorecard Further The site has a number of low issues due to the location of historic and cultural assets within the village.

126 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: CS0702 CS0703 Site Ref (where applicable): SC15/h2 Location: Land at College Bach, Llangynog Site Area (Ha): 1.1 ha Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? No Relevant Planning History No recent and relevant planning history 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

127 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The candidate site consists of a parcel of land set to the northern end of the village and directly accessed from the C2081. The site is located within the linear form of Llangynog and immediately adjacent to the development limits to its south. The site is relatively flat with a defensible boundary on all sides. It is considered that this site on its own would not be able to accommodate 5 or more dwellings in isolation. There is also a parcel of land further north which would also be able to accommodate a number of plots and follow the general planning principles required with development (CS0703 Site Ref: ). For these reasons the overall site went forward to the Technical Officer Group has having the potential to be considered as an allocation. No objections have been received from the Countryside Council for Wales or the Planning Ecologist. The Head of Transport has offered no objection to the allocation of the site.

128 The EA indicate no objection to the allocation but make relevant comments regarding pollution prevention. Dyfed Archaeological Trust has placed the site within Category D. The site offers the potential for small scale development, all of which would front onto the main through road within Llangynog, and would be similar to the eisting urban form. It would therefore not cause any amenity issues to neighbouring dwellings. With Llangynog being grouped with Bancyfelin, the majority of the allocated development will take place in Bancyfelin, given its position close to the A40. Nevertheless the potential for 5 dwellings at College Bach offers potential to consolidate the social fabric of the settlement and to utilise the services it provides. For these reasons the site is to be put forward as an allocation within the LDP. The site has been through the SA process, a summary of which can be found at the end of this pro forma. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths

129 Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. No known constraints. Yes No Unknown 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 29 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 2 1 Medium 0 0 High 3 6 See Scorecard for breakdown of issues Opportunities: See Scorecard for breakdown of opportunities. Further There are a significant number of high prospective opportunities

130 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: CL15/a Site Ref (where applicable): SC16/h1 Location: Adjacent to Parc y Delyn Site Area (Ha): 0.6 ha Eisting Use* Agricultural Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Yes Relevant Planning History No relevant planning history 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

131 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The site in question relates to agricultural land on the north eastern tip of Llanybri. The site has natural boundaries on the north and eastern side, the farm to its south and the estate of Parc y Delyn to its west. The site is elevated from the road but is relatively flat in nature. The site forms as a current allocation in the UDP, therefore it has been through previous assessments during the eamination of the UDP. Nevertheless the site was put through to the Technical Officers Group. The Environment Agency offers no objection to this site. The Head of Transport offer no objection to the development of the site but would require visibility improvements and footways. This could be achieved on the site, and details of which would be made at a planning application stage.

132 No response has been received from Dwr Cymru Welsh Water, the Countryside Council for Wales or from the Planning Ecologist. This site provides one of few opportunities for development in Llanybri and within the Sustainable Community in general. Its inclusion in the LDP will help consolidate the economic and social fabric of the village. The site would integrate into the community and the development of 10 properties would not be harmful to the character of the area. For this reason, the site is likely to come forward within the short medium term; therefore the site can be put forward as a housing allocation within the LDP. The site has been through the SA process, a summary of which can be found at the end of the pro forma. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths

133 Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 75 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 3 3 Medium 0 1 High 3 10 See scorecard for further comments Opportunities: See scorecard for further comments Further The site has a significant number of high prospective opportunities

134 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC17/H1 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Parc y Garreg Site Area (Ha): 2.46 Eisting Use* Under construction/resi Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Relevant Planning History Outline S/09198, S/ Reserved Matters (2008) 74 units - (includes affordable units) phasing no more than 50 dwellings to be built within 3 years of commencement approved. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

135 The site visit pics demonstrate that the site is well under construction and moving towards completion. 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 *Note the consideration of flooding in this pro forma is primarily based on evidence available at the time of deposit LDP publication. Detailed consideration of updated evidence with regards to flood risk issues on allocated sites eg updated TAN 15 Development Advice Maps (March 2013) is provided in the Council s Strategic Flood Consequence Assessment (SFCA). The SFCA also contains recommendations for post deposit/focused changes as a means to ensure accordance with national policy* Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value

136 Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown Site has PP and is under construction

137 6. Additional The site is situated within close proimity to the A484 and is classified as brown field. It is known locally as The former Optic and has good sustainability credentials given its links with a nearby bus stop along with the community/educational/recreational provisions in Mynyddygarreg/Kidwelly. The site is also identified as Parc Gwenllian / Parc y Garreg. The site has full planning permission and construction was well under way when the site was visited with some units already occupied. The HLAS states that there have been no completions to date within the plan period. As part of the planning permission attained a phasing provision was built into the scheme. This site is likely to yield a volume house building offer with a wide mi of house types/densities. This is important because adjacent site SC17 H2 is characterised by large detached dwellings of a low density. When put together these sites ensure that the settlement has a wide range and mi of dwelling types delivered across the plan period. Given that the site is a reasonable allocation option it was circulated for TOG/SA review. The TOG feedback is available on file. No issues raised preclude a plan level allocation, the EA mention previous uses and up stream issues however they would have been amply consulted when the full planning permission was granted in any case. All relevant consultees would have been consulted as part of the planning permissions granted. Given that the site has planning permission and is under construction it is deemed logical that it is allocated within the LDP for residential development so that it can make a contribution towards meeting the identified growth requirement for the SC. In this regard, the site is to be allocated for 74 units in accordance with the consent issued. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: Score Summary Count 25 Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Low 6 6 Medium 4 11 High 2 10 Issues The majority of the issues raised can be addressed via the opportunities presented it should be noted that the site is proimate to a feature of cultural/historic importance and this does impact upon the overall score in SA terms. Particular reference should be made to the site s proimity to the A484. The score may be lowered by the fact that the site is a little detached from the centre of Mynyddygarreg, although it is located on the main road and thus can demonstrate good links to the village centre and indeed nearby Kidwelly. Opportunities: There are a range of opportunities, particularly in terms of social fabric, health and well being and climatic factors it is clear that if the attention of these opportunities will be linked to public transport provision and it should be noted that Further the site is adjacent to a bus stop. The score of 25 is relatively poor for an SC, however the site has planning permission and is under construction therefore its allocation for residential development is sound.

138 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC17/H2 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Parc Felindre Site Area (Ha): 0.18net Eisting Use* Residential/U Construction Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? White land Relevant Planning History S/07700 approval of reserved matters for housing development (2004) 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits) The site visit pic demonstrates the site under development and substantively completed.

139 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 *Note the consideration of flooding in this pro forma is primarily based on evidence available at the time of deposit LDP publication. Detailed consideration of updated evidence with regards to flood risk issues on allocated sites eg updated TAN 15 Development Advice Maps (March 2013) is provided in the Council s Strategic Flood Consequence Assessment (SFCA). The SFCA also contains recommendations for post deposit/focused changes as a means to ensure accordance with national policy* Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations:

140 General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown

141 6. Additional The site is already under construction and the HLAS confirms that 5 completions have taken place on site to date within the plan period, with some capacity remaining for more development on site (6 units). The HLAS also states that 4 completions took place pre plan period out of a total of 15 units. The build out to date on site is characterised by large detached dwellings and the overall contet is that of a low density. This site will therefore assist in bringing forward a range and mi of development sites within the settlement given that the former Optic Site (SC17 H1) is likely to yield a volume house building offer with a wider mi of house types/densities. Given that the site is a reasonable allocation option it was circulated for TOG/SA review. The TOG feedback is available on file all relevant consultees would have been consulted as part of the planning permissions granted. Given that the site has planning permission and under construction it is deemed logical that it is allocated within the LDP for residential development so that it can make a contribution towards meeting the identified growth requirement for the SC. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: Score Summary Count -3 Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 8 10 Medium 4 7 High 1 8 The majority of the issues raised can be addressed via the opportunities presented it should be noted that the site is proimate to a feature of cultural/historic importance and this does impact upon the overall score in SA terms. Particular reference should be made to the site s proimity to the A484. The score may be lowered by the fact that the site is a little detached from the centre of Mynyddygarreg, although it is located on the main road and thus can demonstrate good links to the village centre and indeed nearby Kidwelly. Opportunities: There are a range of opportunities, particularly in terms of social fabric, health and well being and climatic factors it is clear that if the attention of these opportunities will be linked to public transport provision and it should be noted that the site is adjacent to a bus stop. Further The score of -3 is poor for an SC, however the site has planning permission and is under construction/substantively completed therefore its allocation for residential development is sound.

142 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC17/H3 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Adj. The Croft Site Area (Ha): 1.1 Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? yes Relevant Planning History Outline permission was granted March S/ Reserved matters 32 units was refused and appeal dismissed highways issues mainly S/ June S/ conditions were varied with the consent. S/ Resolution granted by Committee 11 Nov 2010 reserved matters (28 units). 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

143 The site visit pics demonstrate the highway contet as well as footpath links. The site presents as well integrated into the landscape and not overly eposed. 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 *Note the consideration of flooding in this pro forma is primarily based on evidence available at the time of deposit LDP publication. Detailed consideration of updated evidence with regards to flood risk issues on allocated sites eg updated TAN 15 Development Advice Maps (March 2013) is provided in the Council s Strategic Flood Consequence Assessment (SFCA). The SFCA also contains recommendations for post deposit/focused changes as a means to ensure accordance with national policy* Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value

144 Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown Site has attained consent and a recent committee resolution

145 6. Additional The site is centrally located and within close proimity to the community hub (school, village hall and amenity area). It is rectangular in shape and compromises of a single field with an overgrown hedge sub-dividing the site from east to west, therefore creating two individual areas rectangular in shape. Development of the site would conform to the eisting patterning of development within the village. The site does have some clear advantages: - the site boasts a high level of spatial sustainability given its location at the heart of the village; - its development would conform with the eisting character of the settlement; - the site is in the ownership of a developer and thus deliverability potential is high; - the site is currently allocated within the UDP; - The site has recently attained a Committee resolution and an outline consent. The issues relating to the allocating of this site are the past refusals / appeal and concerns over highways capacity which emerged from the site visit. Given that the site was deemed a reasonable allocation option it was circulated for TOG/SA review. Particular interest would be given to any feedback received on highways matters/capacity. The TOG feedback is available on file (no adverse comments were raised that would preclude a plan level allocation) and the relevant statutory consultees would have been consulted in detail as part of the recent reserved matters application. Given that the site has attracted planning status it is deemed logical that it is allocated within the LDP for residential development so that it can make a contribution towards meeting the identified growth requirement for the settlement and the wider SC. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: Score Summary Count 130 Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 5 5 Medium 3 7 High 0 11 The issues raised can all be addressed via the opportunities presented, reference should be made in particular to the potential to further improve public transport provision to service the site. Opportunities: Given the site s high levels of spatial sustainability adjacent to the school and village hall it is clear that there are opportunities presented in terms of education and skills, social fabric and health/wellbeing. Further A score of 130 within an SC is very good and this further underpins the soundness of re allocating the site for residential development.

146 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: FCM/SC17/a Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Land opposite Parc y Garreg Site Area (Ha): 1.01ha Eisting Use* Former car park Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Relevant Planning History 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

147 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 A more detailed review of flood risk issues is provided in the LDP SFCA. Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value

148 Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown

149 6. Additional CS0196 presents as a flat and accessible parcel of land at the southern gateway into the settlement. The northern area of the site consists of the former car park for the UK Optic site which offers a significant and prominent frontage onto the main road. This northern portion presents as a parcel of land that can be considered akin to an urbanised contet given the areas of hard standing on site/previous uses. However the southern area of the site sits more comfortably within a natural environment/open countryside setting. The site adjoins the development limits along its north eastern boundary. The pertinent issues to consider with regards to the site are: - The site is proimate to the A484 and public transport links; - The site contains an element of previously developed land; - It benefits from ecellent access and road infrastructure, although there may be issues with land contamination associated with the previous uses on site; - The Biodiversity Settlement Study suggests that a connectivity corridor running through the site will need to be considered/built into a future project/application level scheme; - Development will assist in improving the appearance of a derelict site located on the settlement s southern gateway; - Confidence in deliverability is re affirmed given that representations have been received at candidate site and deposit stage seeking the site s allocation; - The settlement rounding off point currently provided by the farm track to Penywaun will need to be etended southward should the site be allocated; - It should be noted that the settlement has high deliverability potential due to the fact that the other sites are already under construction and/or committed. It is clear therefore that the settlement has market appeal and that the site is very likely to be delivered within the Plan period. The site was considered to be a reasonable allocation option and was therefore circulated for TOG/SA Review. In terms of TOG feedback: County Ecologist Scrub, Brownfield BAP habitat? Hedgerows, Grassland potentially of interest SV req to determine quality. EA Buffer required to protect spring in SW corner. Current guide lines do not allow us to support building over or culverting an open watercourse. We would also epect the integrity of the watercourse to remain in tact with a natural margin. There is a culvert running across the site. Ownership and maintenance should be addressed prior to any formal applications. SUDS. It is considered that the above matters are deemed to be issues that could be addressed at project/application level and would not preclude a Plan level allocation. Whilst the site was not required for the purposes of the deposit LDP, it is now deemed to be appropriate for inclusion within the LDP as a focused change. It provides a key option in assisting in meeting the overall growth requirements across the County and represents a deliverable development opportunity at a highly sustainable location which also boasts market appeal. The allocated area for the focused change will be focus mainly on the brown field area of the site. It will round off to a suitable southern boundary (essentially that which was as submitted in deposit representation reference D5122/3). This refined site area from that which was submitted as a candidate site provides an opportunity to bring previously developed land back into beneficial use without compromising the adjacent area of natural/open countryside to the south. This amended site area also allows for a suitably defined rounding off point for the settlement to be identified south of the farm track to Penywaun and take advantage of the site s prominent frontage. Due consideration may be given to informing linkages with any LDP phasing plan should one be developed, particularly given the fact that other sites in the settlement are already committed and/or under construction.

150 Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal (CS0196) Score: Score Summary Count 103 Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Low 4 12 Medium 2 7 High 1 8 Issues There are no issues that cannot be addressed via the opportunities presented reference should be made to the SA scorecard in this regard. Particular reference should be made to the site s proimity to the A484. Opportunities: There are a range of opportunities, particularly in terms of social fabric, health and well being and climatic factors it is clear that if the attention of these opportunities will be linked to public transport provision and it should be noted that the site is adjacent to a bus stop. Further The score of 103 within an SC is good.

151 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC18/h1 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Land at Parc yr Ebol, Bronwydd (UDP site description) Land to rear of Swyn Aderyn, Bronwydd (LDP site description) Site Area (Ha): 0.96 Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Residential Allocation (CL17/a) Relevant Planning History The site was allocated for residential development in the UDP referenced site CL17/a. W/20622 Pending application for outline consent for a residential development of up to 15 dwellings and associated access road is pending. Update: 23/5/13 Planning Committee resolved to approve the application subject to section 106 agreement. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)?

152 Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits) 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General No Yes?

153 Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown Under application W/20622 the proposed access point is directly from Bronwydd Road between the residential properties of Llanarth and Trevelyan. The Carmarthenshire County Council Highways Division has noted that visibility may be restricted at this point. These comments have been noted and the visibility splays are being assessed as part of application W/ There are ongoing discussions between the Highways Division and the proposed developer in relation to establishing sufficient visibility splays to accommodate a suitable access point. As part of application W/20622 a Wildlife Survey was carried out of the application site and candidate site together. The Survey identified that development could potentially have an impact upon wildlife habitats and made a series of recommendations which would minimise the potential adverse impact which development may have upon otter, badger, bat and reptile habitat. These issues can be addressed and overcome at application stage through incorporating appropriate mitigation measures. The Environment Agency s (EA) feedback provided a number of points to be taken into

154 consideration at project level: a buffer strip would be required along the watercourse which adjoins the site s northern boundary: SUDS should be implemented as part of any development on the site; and, no culverting shall be permitted on the site unless for absolutely necessary access purposes. These are matters for consideration at application stage but do not highlight any insurmountable issues which would affect the site s deliverability. The EA has recommended consultation with Dŵr Cymru Welsh Water (DCWW) in order to ensure that there is adequate hydraulic and biological capacity with the pumping station to serve the potential level of growth in the settlement. DCWW has been consulted in relation to pending application W/20622 and no insurmountable issues have been raised in relation to the hydraulic and biological capacity. 6. Additional The candidate site is located at the south-west part of the village in close proimity to a cluster of dwellings. The site is located to the rear of two properties- Llanarth and Trevelyan- which adjoin the west side of the A484 road. The site is an irregular shaped agricultural field and its sides are defined by eisting field boundaries. The site s east side adjoins the rear of dwellings which are adjacent to the A484 road. To the north the site is bordered by a stream, trees and hedgerow and to the south there is an agricultural field and woodland. The site slopes slightly generally from east to west towards the road. The sloping on the site is not considered to be an issue which would impact upon the visual amenity of the settlement nor on the general amenity and privacy of the adjacent properties. It is considered that development on the site would be well-related to the eisting urban residential form and would be well-defined by the sloping topography and trees adjacent to the south and west sides of the site. An overhead transformer is situated within the site close to the western boundary and overhead power lines cross the site. This would need to be taken into account when the site is being developed and may possibly need to be diverted or relocated. Development in Brownydd is constrained due to the large proportion of land which falls within the floodzone as shown on the TAN15 Development Advice Maps. However, the site in question is not affected by flooding and offers a potentially suitable site for development in a constrained settlement. The site is in close proimity to a well-serviced bus stop which links the settlement with the Carmarthen growth area which is well-serviced in terms of the range of facilities, transport links and employment opportunities it offers. The settlement itself offers limited provision in terms of facilities and necessary services however due to the site s close proimity to Carmarthen and the frequent public transport services which link the two settlements it is considered that the site contributes to the deliverability of the Plan s strategic objectives by providing sustainably located development. It is therefore recommended that the site is retained as a residential allocation in the LDP. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

155 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 86 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 3 4 Medium 0 5 High 4 10 Significant issues arise in relation to Climatic Factors and Population as a result of availability of services and as a result of the site s IMD ranking. Although the settlement of Bronwydd does not provide a large number of facilities and services the nearby market town of Carmarthen offers a range of facilities, public transport links and employment opportunities. Bronwydd is well-linked to Carmarthen by a frequent public transport bus route. Opportunities: Significant opportunities arise in relation to a number of sustainability themes. These primarily relate to the site s access to services and facilities. Further There are no issues which have been raised which indicate that the site should not be developed for residential use. As noted above, the site contributes to the Plan s sustainability objectives due to its proimity to a large market town.

156 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: Cwmffrwd Nurseries Site Ref (where applicable): SC18/h2 Location: Land formerly part of Cwmffrwd Nurseries (east side) Site Area (Ha): 0.5ha Eisting Use* Vacant / overgrown land Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? No Relevant Planning History W/18710 Reserved matters permission for 10 dwellings on the eastern side Decision 06/11/ Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

157 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The site has a recent planning permission and therefore it has not required an assessment by the Technical Officer Group. As this is a commitment within the LDP, it can be allocated for residential development for 10 dwellings. The site has been through the SA process, a summary of which is at the end of this pro forma. NB: Update 10/05/12 - Reference should be made to the Council s schedule of focused changes which has direct implications for this Deposit LDP allocation. Particular regard should be given to the Council s response to Deposit LDP representation reference D6142 and the proposed focused change to this site.

158 Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 135 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 6 1 Medium 0 8 High 4 14 See scorecard for further comments

159 Opportunities: See scorecard for further comments Further The site has a significant number of high prospective opportunities

160 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: CS0014 CS0083 CS0084 CS0085 CS0086 CS0439 Site Ref (where applicable): SC18/h Location: Land adj to Maes Glasnant Estate, Cwmffrwd Site Area (Ha): Full Area: 1.69 hectares Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? No Relevant Planning History There is no relevant planning history 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed)

161 Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits) 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The parcel of greenfield land is set adjacent to an eisting residential estate of Maes Glasnant, which is predominantly characterised by detached bungalows and large detached houses. An eisting estate road leads into the field following the completion of 2 new detached dwellings. Since the site is large, it could accommodate a significant number of dwellings and therefore there would be increased pressure on the eit of Heol Nantyglasdwr and Heol Bolohaul. Following an assessment by the Head of Transport it is considered that there is no objection in principle to the

162 development of the site, however highway works may need to be considered to bring the site forward. This would need to be detailed at a planning application stage. The site is relatively flat with established hedgerow boundary treatments. The site has no biodiversity concerns. The site is listed as a category D by Dyfed Archaeological Trust and therefore there is no issue in the allocation of the site. The settlement is served by the Parc y Splott WWTW which discharges to the Three Rivers Estuary. They may be issues with the Water Framework Directive which is currently being investigated. The Environment Agency has not objected to the allocation of this site however. No response has been received from Dwr Cymru Welsh Water. Cwmffrwd forms as part of Sustainable Community SC18 which utilises Carmarthen as its key service centre. It is considered that the land offers a greater potential for allocation than the other settlements within the SC, and therefore it is considered sensible to bring this site forward within the LDP period. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads)

163 Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths No Yes Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 129 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 4 3 Medium 0 6 High 4 14 Opportunities: Close distance to health facilities and sport / recreational facilities No air quality issues High frequency bus routes nearby. No constraints on cultural heritage or landscape qualities Close links to Carmarthen, including social and economic inclusion Further

164 1. Site Details Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma Ref: Cl17/g Site Ref (where applicable): SC18/h4 Location: Adjacent to Ffrwdwen Site Area (Ha): 1.1ha Eisting Use* Agricultural Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Yes Relevant Planning History None 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

165 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The site forms as a current allocation in the UDP, therefore it has been through previous assessments during the eamination of the UDP. Cwmffrwd has been identified as a sustainable community with close links to Carmarthen, and therefore is within close proimity to the services that Carmarthen provides. 3 sites have been identified for inclusion in the LDP with a total sum of 63 dwellings over the course of the LDP period and this site in question provides an element of that apportionment. The site has a boundary of residential properties on three of its sides, and therefore it would be in keeping with the surrounding urban form, and would not encroach into the countryside. The other side has a natural boundary with agricultural fields to its western side. This curtails any encroachment into the open countryside. The site was put through to the Technical Officers Group. No objection has been received from the Planning Ecologist or the Countryside Council for Wales

166 The Head of Transport identifies restricted width to the site, however it is considered that a detailed planning application would provide a suitable access and improved footways from the A484 to the site. The Environment Agency has not objected to the inclusion of this site as an allocation, however they have a number of issues which include Cwmffrwd failing to meet the Water Framework Directive. Welsh Water has not commented on the proposal. Dyfed Archaeological Trust identifies the site as being within Category C. This site, along with the other two allocations provides one of few acceptable development opportunities within this village. The site has been through the SA process, a summary of which is highlighted below. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths

167 Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. No known constraints. Yes No Unknown 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 109 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 4 8 Medium 0 9 High 4 10 Opportunities: Close distance to health facilities and sport / recreational facilities No air quality issues High frequency bus routes nearby. No constraints on cultural heritage or landscape qualities Close links to Carmarthen, including social and economic inclusion Further

168 1. Site Details Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma Ref: CS0161 Site Ref (where applicable): SC18/h5 Location: East of Llangain, south of Dol y Dderwen Site Area (Ha): 2.8ha Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? No Relevant Planning History 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

169 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The candidate site consists of a large agricultural field of 2.8 hectares set immediately adjacent to the urban form of Llangain. Access to the site could be made from three locations; Church Road and two cul-de-sac points within the estate of Dol y Dderwen. The site is flat and would form as the logical etension in the settlement. The site would also increase the sustainability of the key services within the village. This site provides one of very few acceptable opportunities for new development within Llangain.

170 The main concern with the field is its large size and the potential impacts on the community by increasing the number of dwellings within the area. To counter this, it is considered that a phasing of the development at this site would be more in keeping with the settlement and allows Llangain to absorb the number of houses over a period of time. Given the size of the site and the density within the area, it is considered that 25 dwellings would be acceptable on the site. The site was taken to the Technical Officer Group for consideration. Dyfed Archaeological Trust noted that the site was within Category D therefore there are no immediate archaeological issues with the site. The Highways section would require highway improvements to be made, however there are a number of potential access points for the development. The EA have stated that Llangain is served by the Parc Y Splott WWTW which discharges to the Three Rivers Estuary. The Three Rivers Estuary is currently failing to meet Water Framework Directive standards for dissolved nitrogen. The EA are undertaking investigations in this catchment to determine the potential source(s) of dissolved nitrogen and possible opportunities to reduce the nutrient loading to the stretch. The works are not in the AMP 5 quality programme, although listed for Change Protocol to be included under Habitats driver. The EA recommend consultation with DCWW to ensure hydraulic and biological capacity and possible phasing of development. If Dwr Cymru feel unable to accept this allocation or cannot remain compliant within their Environmental Permit then the EA would object. DCWW are members of the Technical Officer Group and have been consulted, however no response has been received. No comments have been received from the Countryside Council for Wales. The site was put through the SA process. Details of which are highlighted below Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) No Yes Partly Adjacent

171 Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 128 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 2 5 Medium 1 2 High 3 15 See scorecard for issue breakdown Opportunities: High frequency buses within 250m Close to National Cycle Network Route Close to facilities associates with a community Further

172 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: CS1256 Site Ref (where applicable): / SC18/h6 Location: Land at Peniel Site Area (Ha): 1.15 Eisting Use* Agricultural Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Outside development limits Relevant Planning History None. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

173 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

174 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional This site has also been submitted under reference / CS1255 for part of the northern end of the site. The site is located to the west of the centre of the settlement. It is a flat grassed agricultural field and has a strong hedgerow on it s eastern boundary with the A485. To the north and south of the site lie residential properties and to the west of the site agricultural land. The site is well located in terms of access to the services that Peniel has to offer. The site can also be considered as being infill, or rounding off the settlement. It is considered that part of the site is a suitable site for housing and it is proposed that it is allocated for housing development, suitable for 10 dwellings. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 71 Score Summary Count Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities

175 Issues - Opportunities: - Further Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. 8. Technical Officer Group Dyfed Archaeological Trust Category D - The proposed allocation and development of this site may impact adversely on a heritage asset. However, this site can be allocated as historic environment interests can be protected through the attachment of appropriate conditions to planning consent. Highways Biodiversity Officer Environment Agency m visibility required. 5.5m wide road, 1.8m footways turning facilities. Hedgerows, Demolition Bats. Biodiversity & Fisheries: No known issues. Pollution Prevention: Settlement is served by the Parc Y Splott WWTW which discharges to the Three Rivers Estuary. The Three Rivers Estuary is currently failing to met Water Framework Directive standards for dissolved nitrogen. We are undertaking investigations in this catchment to determine the potential source(s) of dissolved nitrogen and possible opportunities to reduce the nutrient loading to the stretch. The works are not in the AMP 5 quality programme, although listed for Change Protocol to be included under Habitats driver. We would recommend consultation with DCWW to ensure hydraulic and biological capacity and possible phasing of development. If Dwr Cymru feel unable to accept this allocation or cannot remain compliant within their Environmental Permit we would object. Flood Risk: No known issues. Groundwater & Contaminated Land: No known issues Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

176 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: H1 (CL17c) Site Ref (where applicable): ACS / SC18/h7 Location: Adj Aberdauddwr, Peniel Site Area (Ha): 0.4 Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Allocated for residential use (CL17c) for 6 units Relevant Planning History W/13502 Full planning permission granted for 10 dwellings Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

177 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

178 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site has full planning permission and five of the ten dwellings have been completed. The site appears to be on stop at present and work has not commenced on the five remaining dwellings. The site has planning permission and it is an acceptable site, therefore it is proposed to continue the site s allocation in the Local Development Plan for 10 dwellings. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 71 Score Summary Count Issues - Opportunities: - Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Further Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail.

179 Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

180 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC19 h1 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Former Hall, Alltwalis Site Area (Ha): Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? White land within the development limits Relevant Planning History W/16125 Full planning permission for 8 dwellings 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits) The site has full planning permission and has been implemented with all 8 units being completed on the site in The LDP proposals map should reflect the 8 remaining units, which have been completed within the plan period.

181 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC19/h2 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Adjacent to Llandre, Llanpumsaint Site Area (Ha): Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Allocated for residential development (CL18/f) Relevant Planning History Various planning permissions on the site including: W/3434 Full permission for road & plot layout for 15 units approved 06/11/2001 W/23691 Full permission for 4 plots 19/10/2011 (also numerous individual permissions granted for individual plots) 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

182 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

183 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site is located in the centre of Llanpumsaint and is currently allocated for residential development. Development has commenced on the site, and 6 units were completed prior to 2007 (the base date of the Plan). A further 3 units have been completed since, and planning permission eists for 4 of the remaining 6 units. The majority of the site has planning permission and it is an acceptable site, therefore it is proposed to continue the site s allocation in the Local Development Plan for 9 dwellings (which includes 3 dwellings completed since the Plan s base date). 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 111 Score Summary Count Issues - Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities

184 Opportunities: - Further Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. 8. Technical Officer Group Dyfed Archaeological Trust Category D - The proposed allocation and development of this site may impact adversely on a heritage asset. However, this site can be allocated as historic environment interests can be protected through the attachment of appropriate conditions to planning consent. Highways Environment Agency No observations. Biodiversity & Fisheries: no comment Pollution Prevention: There are currently no significant water body issues. However, your Authority must ensure that this development will not cause deterioration of the water environment thus impacting on the Water Framework Directive classification. In addition we recommend consultation with DCWW to ensure that there is adequate hydraulic and biological capacity with the pumping station to serve this level of growth. Flood Risk: The site is close proimity of the etreme fluvial flood outline for the Afon Gwili. We do not have detailed flood maps for the Nant Cwm Cerwyni which could also affect the site. It would be prudent that a fca be produced at the time of a planning application, to ensure that flood risks can be acceptably managed. Our flood maps do not take into account climate change and blockages of inriver structures. SuDS. Groundwater & Contaminated Land: No known issues. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

185 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC9/h3 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Land adj Gwyn Villa, Llanpumsaint Site Area (Ha): 1.4 Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Located outside the development limits Relevant Planning History none 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

186 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

187 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 7. Additional The site is located on the northern periphery of the settlement of Llanpumsaint on an unclassified road to Pencader. The site consists of the southern part of a grassed agricultural field which is bounded on its southern and eastern sides by residential properties. The whole field was initially included in the Deposit Draft Carmarthenshire Unitary Development Plan (UDP), but was removed in the Pre-Inquiry Proposed Changes version which was subsequently confirmed by the Inspector and was ecluded from the development limits in the adopted Plan. The site was removed as it was one of three sites in Llanpumsaint and it was considered that a smaller allocation, on two sites would be more appropriate for the plan period in the settlement. Since this date, one of the two allocated sites has been completed and the other site is partly completed. The inclusion of this site would round off the settlement at this location, and it is considered an appropriate site for development during the plan period. It is considered that the site could accommodate 20 dwellings.

188 8. Technical Officer Group Dyfed Archaeological Trust Category E - This site can be allocated in the LDP as it is unlikely that historic environment interests will be adversely affected by a development proposal. Highways No observations. Environment Agency Biodiversity & Fisheries: Likely to be unsuitable for development due to BAP habitat. Surveys required. Pollution Prevention: There are currently no significant water body issues. However, your Authority must ensure that this development will not cause deterioration of the water environment thus impacting on the Water Framework Directive classification. In addition we recommend consultation with DCWW to ensure that there is adequate hydraulic and biological capacity with the pumping station to serve this level of growth. Flood Risk: No significant issues at the present time. However, please note that our flood map information in that area is not accurate as the watercourse in the vicinity of the site is classed as ordinary. Refer to your drainage engineers. It would be relevant to assess the flood risk from this minor watercourse, which will as a minimum require a detailed site topographic survey with confirmation of finished floor levels relative to the bank and bed levels of the watercourse in the first instance. SuDS. Groundwater & Contaminated Land: No known issues. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

189 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC19/h4 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Bryn Bedw, Rhydargaeau Site Area (Ha): 0.6 Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Allocated for residential use (8 units) (CL18a) Relevant Planning History No recent planning permissions. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

190 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

191 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site is located on the northern edge of Rhydargaeau and consists of a relatively flat grassed field. The site was initially included in the Carmarthen District Local Plan, followed by the Carmarthenshire Unitary Development Plan for 8 units. No recent planning applications have been submitted on the site. Development of the site would round off the settlement at this location. Access to the site is considered to be acceptable as the speed along the A485 has now been reduced to 30 mph. It is considered that the site is an acceptable site and should remain to be allocated for residential use for 11 units.

192 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 59 Score Summary Count Issues - Opportunities: - Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Further Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. 8. Technical Officer Group Dyfed Archaeological Trust Category D - The proposed allocation and development of this site may impact adversely on a heritage asset. However, this site can be allocated as historic environment interests can be protected through the attachment of appropriate conditions to planning consent. Highways Currently inadequate visibility on the A485 frontage at approimately 80m to the South with 120m to the North. There are proposals to reduce speed limit in this area to 30mph. This will require 90m visibility splays in both directions which are achievable with a revised access location. The rear access to the site is of unacceptable standard with narrow carriageways and no footways. Environment Agency Biodiversity & Fisheries: No known issues. Pollution Prevention: There are currently no significant water body issues. However, your Authority must ensure that this development will not cause deterioration of the water environment thus impacting on the Water Framework Directive classification. In addition we recommend consultation with DCWW to ensure that there is adequate hydraulic and biological capacity with the pumping station to serve this level of growth. Flood Risk: No issues. SuDS. Groundwater & Contaminated Land: No known issues. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

193 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC19/h5 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Cefn Farm / Bryn Bedw, Rhydargaeau Site Area (Ha): 0.9 Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Wider site is allocated for residential use (34 units) (part CL18b) Relevant Planning History W/16006 Outline permission refused 11/7/08 W/19939 Outline permission pending 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

194 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

195 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site is located on the northern part of Rhydargaeau on the eastern side of the A485. The site consists of part of a relatively flat field, which has been used to grow crops and also has been laid to pasture, and lies north of the Dan y Dderwen cul-de-sac. Access to the site can be gained either directly from the A485, or from Dan y Dderwen. The site, along with a wider area was included in the Carmarthenshire Unitary Development Plan for 34 units. Planning permission was refused on the wider site in 2008 as it was considered the application was premature, given that there is a public service provision objection due to the fact that the main sewer system was not capable of accepting the foul drainage from this development, without detriment to the local environment. A further application has been submitted for the wider site but has not yet been determined. It is considered that the site is an acceptable site and should remain to be allocated for residential use for 18 units.

196 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 59 Score Summary Count Issues - Opportunities: - Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Further Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. 8. Technical Officer Group Dyfed Archaeological Trust Category C - The proposed allocation and development of this site may impact adversely on an important heritage asset, which is unlikely to be of such importance that allocation cannot proceed. However, prior to the determination of a planning application this site should be assessed/evaluated to determine more precisely the character and etent of the heritage asset. Highways Environment Agency Currently inadequate visibility splays onto a 40mph County Road A485. There are proposals to reduce the speed limit to 30mph. A bus stop lies within the required visibility splays. The eisting site Dan Y Dderwen also provide adequate access facilities. A rear access off the unclassified county road would be sub-standard and inadequate to serve the site. Biodiversity & Fisheries: No known issues. Pollution Prevention: There are currently no significant water body issues. However, your Authority must ensure that this development will not cause deterioration of the water environment thus impacting on the Water Framework Directive classification. In addition we recommend consultation with DCWW to ensure that there is adequate hydraulic and biological capacity with the pumping station to serve this level of growth. Flood Risk: No issues. SuDS. Groundwater & Contaminated Land: No known issues. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

197 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC20/h1 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Adj Yr Hendre, Llanfihangel-ar-arth Site Area (Ha): 0.47 Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Allocated for residential development (CL19d) Relevant Planning History None 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

198 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

199 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site is currently allocated in the Carmarthenshire Unitary Development Plan for 8 units. Since its allocation, no planning applications have been forthcoming on the site. The site is a flat grassed field located on the northern edge of the settlement of Llanfihangel-ar-arth. A Public House lies in the north-west corner of the site (The Eagle Inn) and residential properties lie to the south and south-west of the site. have been made by the Highways Department highlighting that there could be issues relating to the access in terms of visibility. It is considered that these issues could be overcome at the time of a planning application and they are not sufficient to remove the site from the development limits. It is considered that this is the most appropriate site for residential development within the village and should remain to be allocated for housing, suitable for 8 units.

200 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 40 Score Summary Count Issues - Opportunities: - Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Further Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. 8. Technical Officer Group Dyfed Archaeological Trust Category C - The proposed allocation and development of this site may impact adversely on an important heritage asset, which is unlikely to be of such importance that allocation cannot proceed. However, prior to the determination of a planning application this site should be assessed/evaluated to determine more precisely the character and etent of the heritage asset. Highways There appears to be a parking area within the visibility splay area to the north of the site. There appears to be a neighbour s boundary hedge obstructing visibility to the south. The visibility splays would need to be secured before any application is granted. Environment Agency Biodiversity & Fisheries: no comment Pollution Prevention: There are currently no significant water body issues. However, your Authority must ensure that this development will not cause deterioration of the water environment thus impacting on the Water Framework Directive classification. In addition we recommend consultation with DCWW to ensure that there is adequate hydraulic and biological capacity with the pumping station to serve this level of growth. Flood Risk: We would not have any significant concerns regarding fluvial flood risks and development of the site. A culvert runs in relative close proimity to the boundaries of the site. It would be advisable that your drainage engineers are consulted on any flood risk issues at this location. SuDS. Groundwater & Contaminated Land: No known issues. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

201 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: ACS Site Ref (where applicable): H1- SC20/h2 Location: Adj. Nant y Gelli, New Inn Site Area (Ha): 0.9 Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Allocated for residential use, 8 units (CL19a) Relevant Planning History W/04343 outline residential development granted Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

202 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

203 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site is located in the centre of New Inn, access to the site can be undertaken either from the A485 (subject to highway approval) or via the road that leads to Gwernogle. The majority of the land is grassed agricultural land, part is currently being used as tractor storage in association with the J Davies & Son agricultural machinery site that lies opposite the site on the A485. The allocated site does not follow field boundaries and the boundary as currently delineated would require the removal of a number of trees and hedgerows. It is however, conveniently situated in the village and development of the site would not harm the appearance, the character or the general amenity in the area. It is therefore proposed to confine the development to the eisting field pattern and allocate part of the land for residential development, suitable for 8 dwellings (0.5ha). 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 56 Score Summary Count Issues - Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities

204 Opportunities: - Further Site has a positive score. See score card for further detail. 8. Technical Officer Group Dyfed Archaeological Trust Category D - The proposed allocation and development of this site may impact adversely on a heritage asset. However, this site can be allocated as historic environment interests can be protected through the attachment of appropriate conditions to planning consent. Highways m visibility required eisting use. 5.5m wide road 1.8m footways. Biodiversity Officer Environment Agency Hedgerows, mature trees? Bats? Biodiversity & Fisheries: No known issues. Pollution Prevention: There are currently no significant water body issues. However, your Authority must ensure that this development will not cause deterioration of the water environment thus impacting on the Water Framework Directive classification. Flood Risk: No known issues. Developers should implement SUDS within any proposed development. Groundwater & Contaminated Land: No known issues. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

205 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: ACS Site Ref (where applicable): H1 SC20/h3 Location: Blossom Inn, New Inn Site Area (Ha): Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Part H1 allocation, part outside development limits (CL19c) Relevant Planning History Various applications including: W/ dwellings granted W/22520 outline application approved subject to S106 agreement illustrating 8 dwellings 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

206 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

207 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site is located in the centre of the village, access to which is gained from a minor road that goes to Llanfihangel-ar-Arth. Part of the site has been allocated for residential development in the UDP, suitable for 6 dwellings. Part is located outside the development limits. The part that is situated outside the limits was originally set-aside for a proposed by-pass to the village, plans for which have now faded. Planning permission has been granted on the whole site in various applications, for 8 dwellings (on the western part), and four dwellings (on the eastern part). One dwelling has been built on the eastern part to date. The site is sandwiched between a recently completed housing development (Green Meadow) and the main village. The site is conveniently situated in the village and development of the site would not harm the appearance, the character or the general amenity in the area. It is therefore proposed to allocate the land for residential development, suitable for 12 dwellings (based on the permitted applications).

208 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 58 Score Summary Count Issues - Opportunities: - Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Further Site has a positive score. See score card for further detail. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

209 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC20/h4 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Bro r Hen Wr, Pencader Site Area (Ha): Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Allocated for residential development (T6b) Relevant Planning History Various planning applications on the site. The most relevant for the remaining land are as follows: W/20165 Outline permission approved 6/5/11 for 7 units (42/3 bed semi-detached & 32bed terraced. W/19523 Outline planning permission refused 3/9/08 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

210 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes?

211 Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site is located in the centre of Pencader and lies opposite the Primary School. The site previously developed land and is part of land formerly used by the Shadrow Garage. Part of the site has already been completed (10 units have been completed after the base date of the Plan) and the remaining land has a recently approved outline planning permission for 7 units. The site should therefore be allocated for 17 units to reflect this. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 11 Score Summary Count Issues - Opportunities: - Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Further Site has a low score, this is mainly attributed to the fact that the site lies within flood risk zone one and lies adjacent to the river which is a Special Area of Conservation, where otters could be present. See score card for further detail. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

212 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC20/h5 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: North of Maes Cader, Pencader Site Area (Ha): Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Located outside development limits Relevant Planning History No recent permissions. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

213 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality No Yes?

214 Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site is located in the centre of the village of Pencader and lies to the north of the Maes Cader Estate. The site is relatively flat and consists of grassland and trees. The central location of the site in the village is considered to be sustainable and it is considered that the site will not adversely impact upon the character of the settlement at this location. Access to the site can be gained from a number of points and the Council s Highway Department have not raised concerns about accessing the site. For these reasons it is considered that the site is an acceptable site for residential development and should be allocated for 37 dwellings. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 112 Score Summary Count Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities

215 Issues - Opportunities: - Further Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. 8. Technical Officer Group Dyfed Archaeological Trust Category E - This site can be allocated in the LDP as it is unlikely that historic environment interests will be adversely affected by a development proposal. Highways Environment Agency No observations. Biodiversity & Fisheries: Part of this site consits of mature habitat. Surveys requried. Pollution Prevention: There are currently no significant water body issues. However, your Authority must ensure that this development will not cause deterioration of the water environment thus impacting on the Water Framework Directive classification. In addition we recommend consultation with DCWW to ensure that there is adequate hydraulic and biological capacity with the pumping station to serve this level of growth. Flood Risk: The eact no of properties should be determined by the capacity of SuDs scheme that can be installed Groundwater & Contaminated Land: No known issues. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

216 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC20/h6 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Adj. Tremle House, Pencader Site Area (Ha): Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Allocated for residential development (T6d) Relevant Planning History Various permissions inlcluding: W/10170 Outline permission approved for the siting of residential development. W/13839 Reserved matters granted for 9 dwellings W/24232 Variation of Condition for the design of plot 7 approved W/25241 Variation of Condition for the design of plot 3 approved Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

217 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality No Yes?

218 Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site is a triangular parcel of land located on the southern side of Pencader, on the eastern flank of the B4459. Planning permission eists for 9 dwellings on the site. Four dwellings have been completed in recent years (2 in 2008 and 2 in 2009), since the base date of the Plan. A number of the units are currently under construction. For these reasons it is considered appropriate to allocate the site in the Plan for 9 dwellings. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 79 Score Summary Count Issues - Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities

219 Opportunities: - Further Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

220 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC20/E1 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Gwastod Abbot, New Inn Site Area (Ha): 0.45 Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Employment allocation Relevant Planning History Nothing recent 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

221 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

222 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 7. Additional The site is located to the rear of the J Davies & Son Pencader agricultural machinery unit which lies in the middle of the village of New Inn. The site is allocated in the Deposit LDP as a proposed employment use (B1 use). However, since the Plan s publication, a review of sites has been undertaken and it has emerged that the site is currently being used as an employment site. Therefore, in order to reflect the correct position on the land, the site s annotation reflects its eisting use and it is proposed to include this as a focused change in line with the Employment Land Update Paper. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 56 Score Summary Count Issues - Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities

223 Opportunities: - Further Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

224 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC21/h1 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Cilgwyn Bach, Pontwelly Site Area (Ha): Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Allocated for residential development (14 units) (CL23a) Relevant Planning History D4/13872 Siting of 7 dwellings & garages refused 19/11/81 D4/13872 Outline planning permission approved 16/10/88 D4/17524 Housing development & road layout 20/7/90 W/15776 full planning permission refused for 50 dwellings (on a wider site) 20/12/07. Appeal dismissed 11/11/08 W/18886 full planning permission for 31 dwellings has not yet been determined 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

225 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality No Yes?

226 Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site consists of part of part of a grassed field on the south-west of Pontweli. The site is linear and fronts onto Heol y Dderwen and development would reflect the pattern of the properties on the opposite side of the road. The site is currently allocated in the Carmarthenshire Unitary Development Plan The planning history on the site is comple, the landowners of the site believe that planning permission eists in perpetuity on this and the wider site by the granting of reserved matters approval in That planning permission was for the construction of a road and plot layout for 31 dwellings and was safeguarded by the commencement of works in the formation of the access to the development site. Since this date, planning permission has been refused on the site (application no. W/15776), and the appeal was dismissed. This application was for the erection of 50 dwellings on the wider site. The Inspector dismissed the appeal as the application does not make adequate provision for open space. A further planning application has been submitted on the site, which remains undetermined. This application was considered by the Planning Committee and was deferred to consider Counsel s

227 opinion as to the legal status of the commencement of the 1990 application. It is considered that the site remains to be an appropriate site for development and should continue to be allocated in the Local Development Plan, for 17 units. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 28 Score Summary Count Issues - Opportunities: - Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Further See score card for further detail. 8. Technical Officer Group Dyfed Archaeological Trust Category D - The proposed allocation and development of this site may impact adversely on a heritage asset. However, this site can be allocated as historic environment interests can be protected through the attachment of appropriate conditions to planning consent. Highways Environment Agency No observations. Biodiversity & Fisheries: No known issues. Pollution Prevention: There are currently no significant water body issues. However, your Authority must ensure that this development will not cause deterioration of the water environment thus impacting on the Water Framework Directive classification. In addition we recommend consultation with DCWW to ensure that there is adequate hydraulic and biological capacity with the pumping station to serve this level of growth. Flood Risk: The eact no of properties should be determined by the capacity of SuDs scheme that can be installed Groundwater & Contaminated Land: No known issues. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

228 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC21/h2 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Adj. Crug yr Wyn, Pontweli Site Area (Ha): Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Allocated for residential use (20 units) (CL23c) Relevant Planning History W/19946 Residential development (Outline) refused 18/11/08 W/22053 Residential development (Outline) has been granted planning permission subject to a Section 106 agreement which has not yet been signed. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

229 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality No Yes?

230 Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site consists of a slightly undulating grassed field with a number of mature trees, some of which are protected under Tree Preservation Orders. The site is located off a small road, to the east of the B4336. There are a number of houses along the roadside of the site and a number of gaps between the houses which are lined with hedgerow. The land levels drop steeply from the southern end of the site with the road far higher than the dwellings and site below. The land levels drop steeply from the southern end of the site with the road far higher than the dwellings and site below. The site is clearly visible from across the river at Llandysul. The site is currently under grass and there are some ponds in the site at the northern end. The site is allocated for residential use in the Carmarthenshire UDP for 20 units, 1 house has been completed on the site in the early stages of the UDP. Planning permission was refused in 2008 on the whole site due to flooding concerns on the site. However, since this date, flood maps of this area of Pontweli have been reviewed and updated with more accurate etreme flood information. In their advice given to a recent planning application on the site, The Environment Agency state that the degree of flood risk depends significantly on the proposed finished floor levels of the road and new dwellings and any reduction in eisting site levels. It advises that no development should occur below the 0.1% flood contour level of 63.3m AOD. Finished floor levels of any dwelling must

231 be a minimum of 600mm above the 0.1% level. The most recent planning application (W/22053) has been approved, subject to the applicant signing a S106 agreement on the land, which has yet to be signed. It is considered that the site remains to be an acceptable site and should be allocated in the LDP for 19 units. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 95 Score Summary Count Issues - Opportunities: - Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Further Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

232 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC21/E1 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Lewis Street, Pontwelly Site Area (Ha): 0.31 Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Employment allocation Relevant Planning History D4/11910 Site for light industrial use, outline granted Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

233 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

234 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 7. Additional The site is located to the rear and to the south of a small number of units in Lewis Street, Pontwelly. Further employment use is located to the south of the site. The site is low lying and falls within the C2 flood risk zone of the Welsh Government s Development Advice Maps. The site is allocated in the Deposit LDP as a proposed employment use (B1 or B8 use). Reference should be made to the Council s schedule of focused changes which has direct implications for the site s Deposit LDP allocation. Particular regard should be given to the Council s response to deposit LDP representation reference D6142 for more information and the review of Employment Land. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: -53 Score Summary Count Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities 0 8 7

235 Issues - Opportunities: - Further See score card for further detail. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

236 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC21/E2 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Rhydygalfe, Pontwelly Site Area (Ha): 1.7 Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Employment allocation Relevant Planning History None. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

237 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

238 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 7. Additional The site is located alongside the new Pontwelly by-pass and roundabout and consists of two fields, both laid to pasture and being used for agricultural use. Residential properties lie to the east of the site. The site is allocated in the Deposit LDP as a proposed employment use (B1 or B8 use) and was considered to be a suitable site for the employment use in the area. However, since the Plan s publication, a review of sites has been undertaken and the removal of this site is suggested as a focused change in line with the Employment Land Update Paper. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 46 Score Summary Count Issues - Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities

239 Opportunities: - Further Site has a good positive score. See score card for further detail. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

240 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: ACS Site Ref (where applicable): SC22/h1 Location: Land at Aber-Giar, Llanllwni Site Area (Ha): 1.19 Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Frontage within development limits, remaining outside development limits. Relevant Planning History Frontage: W/22914 full planning permission for 4 dwellings W/21411 VoC granted W/18652 One house or bungalow Withdrawn W/16561 One house or bungalow section 70 Non Determination W/12395 Residential development (Outline) Full planning permission D4/24832 Siting of housing development (Outline) D4/17860 Siting of housing development (Outline) Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

241 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

242 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional Located in the northern element of Llanllwni known as Aber Giar, the site is bounded to it s south and north by residential properties, to it s west the A485 and agricultural land to it s east. The A485 that runs to the west of the site is a straight section of road to the north with a wide corner to the south, visibility to the site should not cause difficulties. The land rises from the south to north, but is generally flat. Planning permission eists on the front of the site for 4 dwellings and the road serving these properties has been constructed. A bus stop is located on the southern corner of the site. The principle of residential development has been established on the frontage of the site, the issue to consider is whether including land to the rear is appropriate to create an in-depth development. This part of Llanllwni has a public house (The Belle Vue) and a footpath links the site to it for most of the way. Development of the whole field would constitute rounding off at this location. It is considered that an in-depth development would be more appropriate than the ribbon development currently permitted on the frontage of the site. For this reason, it is considered appropriate to allocate the site for residential development, suitable for 10 dwellings.

243 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 76 Score Summary Count Issues - Opportunities: - Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Further Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. 8. Technical Officer Group Dyfed Archaeological Trust Category D - The proposed allocation and development of this site may impact adversely on a heritage asset. However, this site can be allocated as historic environment interests can be protected through the attachment of appropriate conditions to planning consent. Highways Biodiversity Officer Environment Agency Side road required speed survey may reduce requirement visibility on main road 3 rd party visibility restriction Side road widening, Entrance onto main road required opposite junction spacing required. 5.5m wide road 1.8m footways turning facilities. Hedgerows. Biodiversity & Fisheries: No known issues. Pollution Prevention: This area lies outside the catchment of the public sewer system and we would highlight our concerns over the proliferation of small private disposal facilities. Any private facilities will require either a permit or eemption from the Environment Agency. Possible Section 101 candidate for public foul sewer. Your Authority must ensure that this development will not cause deterioration of the water environment thus impacting on the Water Framework Directive classification. Flood Risk: The site is on the fringe of the fluvial floodplain. Our flood map information however is not very accurate in that area as the NantCeiliog is classed as an ordinary watercourse. As a minimum we will request that a site level survey is submitted in support of any future planning application. Developers should implement SUDS within any proposed development. Groundwater & Contaminated Land: No known issues Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

244

245 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: CS0081 Site Ref (where applicable): SC22/h2 Location: Land adj Ger-y-Bryn, Llanllwni Site Area (Ha): 0.27 Eisting Use* Vacant land Potential Use* Residential development *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Special Landscape Area Relevant Planning History None. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

246 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

247 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site forms part of a wider field located in the centre of Llanllwni, lying close to the Llanllwni Primary School and the Talardd Arms Public House. A bus stop and telephone bo lie on the roadside adjoining the site. The site adjoins the development limits both to the north-east and to the south-west, including the allocated housing site known as Adj. Tan y Bryn which is allocated for 15 units. Development has commenced on this allocated site. The grassed field is relatively level and is currently being used for agricultural purposes. The site, as submitted would promote a linear form of development, whilst in-keeping with the pattern of development in Llanllwni, ribbon development is contrary to Planning Policy Wales. However, the allocation of the whole field would create a more sustainable in-depth development. For this reason, and due to the site s location in close proimity to a number of the settlement s facilities, it is recommended that the whole field is allocated for residential development, suitable for 8 dwellings. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 68 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities

248 Issues - Opportunities: - Low Medium High Further Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. 8. Technical Officer Group Dyfed Archaeological Trust Category C - The proposed allocation and development of this site may impact adversely on an important heritage asset, which is unlikely to be of such importance that allocation cannot proceed. However, prior to the determination of a planning application this site should be assessed/evaluated to determine more precisely the character and etent of the heritage asset. Highways m visibility required restricted visibility 3 rd party land. 5.0m wide road 1.8m footways turning facilities. Biodiversity Officer Environment Agency Hedgerows Biodiversity & Fisheries: No known issues. Pollution Prevention: This area lies outside the catchment of the public sewer system and we would highlight our concerns over the proliferation of small private disposal facilities. Any private facilities will require either a permit or eemption from the Environment Agency. Possible Section 101 candidate for public foul sewer. Your Authority must ensure that this development will not cause deterioration of the water environment thus impacting on the Water Framework Directive classification. Flood Risk: No known issues. Developers should implement SUDS within any proposed development. Groundwater & Contaminated Land: No known issues Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

249

250 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: H1 Site Ref (where applicable): ACS / SC22/h3 Location: Adj. Tan y Bryn, Llanllwni Site Area (Ha): 1.3 Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Housing allocation for 15 units. (CL20a) Relevant Planning History W/05670 outline permission granted on the frontage for 5 plots ( ) W/15265 reserved matters granted on the frontage for 5 plots ( ) 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

251 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

252 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The southern part of the site, that adjoins the A485 has the benefit of planning permission for 5 dwellings. Work has recently commenced, and three units were under construction in the summer of The remainder of the site does not have planning permission. Part of the site is used as a car park, serving the Builders Yard which is situated to the west of the site. This is site is centrally located and is well placed to many of the services the village has to offer, including the Primary School, Post Office / shop and public house. For this reason, it is considered that the site is an appropriate allocation and should remain as such, subject to the site boundary being refined to reflect field boundaries and also ecluding the car park. The revised site should be allocated for 11 dwellings in the LDP (at a similar density to that approved on the frontage).

253 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 68 Score Summary Count Issues - Opportunities: - Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Further Site has a good, positive score. See score card for further detail. 8. Technical Officer Group Dyfed Archaeological Trust Category D - The proposed allocation and development of this site may impact adversely on a heritage asset. However, this site can be allocated as historic environment interests can be protected through the attachment of appropriate conditions to planning consent. Highways Biodiversity Officer Environment Agency Side road required speed survey may reduce requirement visibility on main road 3 rd party visibility restriction Side road widening, Entrance onto main road required opposite junction spacing required. 5.5m wide road 1.8m footways turning facilities. Hedgerows Biodiversity & Fisheries: No known issues. Pollution Prevention: This area lies outside the catchment of the public sewer system and we would highlight our concerns over the proliferation of small private disposal facilities. Any private facilities will require either a permit or eemption from the Environment Agency. Possible Section 101 candidate for public foul sewer. Your Authority must ensure that this development will not cause deterioration of the water environment thus impacting on the Water Framework Directive classification. Flood Risk: No known issues. Developers should implement SUDS within any proposed development. Groundwater & Contaminated Land: No known issues. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

254 Revised site boundary:

255 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: ACS Site Ref (where applicable): SC23/h1 Location: Rear of Springfield, Cwmann (housing allocation CL39a) / Cysgod y Coed Site Area (Ha): 1.1 Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Housing allocation Relevant Planning History W/07656 Outline granted W/11230 Full granted (6 dwellings) W/13481 Reserved matters granted (plots 7 & 8) W/19496 Full granted (plot 13) W/16763 Reserved matter granted (plot 7) W/16194 Full granted (plot 11) 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

256 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

257 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site is currently under construction by O Keeffee Building. The site has various planning permissions. The site is allocated in the UDP for 13 dwellings, but a total of 16 units is more likely. 9 units have been completed up to the period 1/4/09, 6 of which are affordable. All 9 units were completed during the period June 2005 April 2007 (according to the Joint Housing Land Availability Study). The developer is currently on-site progressing with the remaining plots. One plot to the south-east of the site has not yet been completed and a candidate site has been proposed to the east of the site, presumably using this plot as access to the site (CS0806). The site should remain in the UDP as a housing allocation, allocated for 7 units. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 98 Score Summary Count Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities

258 Issues Opportunities: Further Distance to railway station n/a See score card for further detail. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

259 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: ACS Site Ref (where applicable): SC23/h2 Location: Heol Hathren, Cwmann (housing allocation CL39c) Site Area (Ha): 0.7 Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Housing allocation 6 units Relevant Planning History W/04517 outline refused 1/11/01 (refused for reasons relating to sewer connection) D4/23843 full planning permission approved for residential development (12 dwellings) 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

260 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

261 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site is an overgrown parcel of land located to the north west of the eisting residential estae known as Heol Hathren. Access to the site is only achievable through Heol Hathren. In the southern corner of the site lies a row of well maintained garages. Although there is no valid planning permission on the site, the reason for refusal in 2001 (W/04517) related to the additional properties eacerbating the combined sewer overflow problem in the area. At the time of determining the application, correspondence from Hyder noted that improvements were planned to be made in It is considered appropriate to maintain this site as a housing allocation within the development limits, allocated for 12 units. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 137 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities

262 Issues Opportunities: Further Low Medium High Distance to nearest rail station n/a See score card for further detail Technical Officer Group Dyfed Archaeological Trust Category E - This site can be allocated in the LDP as it is unlikely that historic environment interests will be adversely affected by a development proposal. Highways Biodiversity Officer Environment Agency No observations. Appears to be woodland/scrub on 2006 aerial photographs, may qualify as BAP habitat, Bat Survey? Badger potential survey? Otter potential proimity to Afon Teifi SAC Survey? Biodiversity & Fisheries: The site is BAP habitat therefore we recommend consulting with your own County Ecologist. Pollution Prevention: There are currently no significant water body issues. However, your Authority must ensure that this development will not cause deterioration of the water environment thus impacting on the Water Framework Directive classification. We would recommend consultation with DCWW to ensure that the system has both hydraulic and biological capacity to accommodate the level of development without causing pollution. Flood Risk: The site lies in close proimity to the current fluvial flood outline. A site level survey may be required as a minimum assessment. Developers should implement SUDS within any proposed development. Groundwater & Contaminated Land: No known issues. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

263 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: ACS Site Ref (where applicable): SC23/h3 Location: Adj New York, Cwmann (housing allocation CL39d) / Cwrt Deri Site Area (Ha): 1.2 Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Housing allocation (26 units) Relevant Planning History Various planning permissions for residential development including W/16901, W/07545 & D4/20626/48 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

264 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

265 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site now known as Cwrt Deri lies in the centre of the village and is currently under construction by Rheidiol Developments and is nearing completion. A total of 29 dwellings will be on the site. 14 units were completed in the period April 2007-March Due to the base date of the LDP, the site should remain as an allocation for 29 dwellings. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 90 Score Summary Count Issues Low Medium High Distance to the railway station Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Opportunities: Further n/a See score card for further detail

266 Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

267 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: ACS Site Ref (where applicable): SC23/h4 Location: Adj Ram Inn, Cwmann (housing allocation CL39e) Site Area (Ha): 0.9 Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Housing allocation (12 units) Relevant Planning History Various planning permissions including W/09302 & TMT/ Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

268 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

269 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site, now known as Cae Coedmor lies in the south-east corner of the village. The site has been partially completed and it is believed that the developer (Legacy Homes) has gone bankrupt. Planning permission has been granted for 20 units on the site, 17 of which have been completed to date 1 in 2009, 3 in 2008, 8 in 2007 & 5 prior to The site should remain as an allocation, taking into account the base date of the plan, for 7 units (as 13 were completed prior to 2005). 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 86 Score Summary Count Issues Low Medium High Distance from railway station Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Opportunities: n/a

270 Further See score card for further detail. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

271 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: ACS Site Ref (where applicable): SC23/h5 Location: Rear of Post Office, Cwmann (housing allocation CL39f) Site Area (Ha): 1.01 Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Housing allocation (20 units) Relevant Planning History Planning permission was refused on the site in 1990 & 1991 (ref: D4/ due to surface water issues & D4/21136 site lies outside development limits). 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

272 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

273 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site is located in the centre of the village, access directly from the A482. The site is level grassland and appears to be in agricultural use. Electricity cables traverse the site and these may hinder development of the site. Planning permission was refused on the site in the early 1990s and there have been no further submissions since. It is considered that the site is an appropriate allocation and should remain as such within the LDP, suitable for 18 dwellings (taking into account the electricity pylons and the shape of the site). 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 105 Score Summary Count Issues Low Medium High Threats Distance from nearest railway line No. Prospective Opportunities

274 Opportunities: Further n/a See score card for further detail. 8. Technical Officer Group Dyfed Archaeological Trust Category E - This site can be allocated in the LDP as it is unlikely that historic environment interests will be adversely affected by a development proposal. Highways Biodiversity Officer Environment Agency Culvert improvement may be required subject to results of a structural survey. Hedgerows, Stream corridor, grassland potentially of interest SV required to determine quality, semi improved grassland on CCW phase 1 survey. Biodiversity & Fisheries: A 7m buffer strip will be required along the watercourse. We would also enforce our embargo period for any inriver works which runs from 17 October to 17 April. Pollution Prevention: There are currently no significant water body issues. However, your Authority must ensure that this development will not cause deterioration of the water environment thus impacting on the Water Framework Directive classification. We would recommend consultation with DCWW to ensure that the system has both hydrualic and biological capacity to accommodate the level of development without causing pollution. Flood Risk: There is a culvert in the vicinity of the site that may cause flooding to the site. A minimum FCA may be required to address potential flood risks to the site. There is an ordinary watercourse that runs along the eastern boundary of the site. No culverting will be consented. The watercourse should be incorporated in its current state. Developers should implement SUDS within any proposed development. Groundwater & Contaminated Land: No known issues. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

275 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC24/h1 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Land west of Rock Street Site Area (Ha): Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? White land within development limits. Relevant Planning History No 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

276 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The EAW have noted that part of the site is located within a C2 flood risk area, although our maps indicate that the flood zone lies immediately adjacent to the allocation. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? No Yes?

277 Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site has a number of advantages in terms of its designation as a residential allocation free from any obvious constraints, close to the local amenities and services of the settlement, integrated to the eisting residential built. In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement. The Local Planning Authority consider that the designation of this site is appropriate to ensure that sufficient land has been allocated within the LDP for residential development purposes in accordance with Planning Policy Wales. In conclusion this available land can be put forward as a residential allocation within the LDP.

278 The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below. Response to TOG comments: The EA have commented that the site lies partially within a C2 flood risk area. On further inspection, the C2 zone appears to be immediately adjacent to the site and does not infringe upon the site itself. In fact the site is fairly elevated and the land affected by the C2 zone drops away towards the stream in the north west. The C2 zone should not affect the allocation of this site for housing. Any preliminary flood risk assessment work that may potentially be required would be carried out as part of a planning application in accordance with the requirements of the EA. There are currently no significant water body issues. Policy EP1 provides for the consideration of proposals where they relate to impact on water quality and in relation to matters of environmental capacity. Consequently any proposals will be required to satisfy its provisions. made by the County Ecologist are duly noted. Such matters will need to be addressed in relation to the relevant policies of the Plan prior to development taking place. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: -99 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 7 3 Medium 5 0 High 4 6 Issues arise in relation to Climatic Factors and Health & Wellbeing as a result of access to services and under Population as a result of the site s IMD ranking. Opportunities: Further The site has scored poorly in terms of sustainability appraisal, partially because of the high quality landscape environment in which it is located within a SLA. Several other issues contribute to the negative score as pointed out above, however, this must be taken into contet. Caeo forms part of a sustainable community of five separate villages. Constraints in several of these communities means that they are unsuitable to accommodate market housing. Only Caeo and Ffarmers are appropriate in sustainability terms to accommodate housing allocations. In Caeo, topography and landscape value constrain the areas where such allocations could be placed and so this site consequently is the only suitable location.

279

280 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC24/h2 Site Ref (where applicable): Candidate Site Location: Land adj. Tegeirian Site Area (Ha): Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Outside Settlement Limits Relevant Planning History No. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

281 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality No Yes?

282 Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site is a field of improved grassland which is fairly flat and is located centrally within the settlement. The site has advantages in terms of its suitability as a residential allocation, being close to the local amenities and services and well integrated to the eisting built form. In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement. The Local Planning Authority consider that the designation of the subject site is appropriate to ensure that sufficient land has been allocated within the LDP for residential development purposes in accordance with Planning Policy Wales. In conclusion this available land can be put forward as a residential allocation within the LDP. The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.

283 Response to TOG comments: EA: There are currently no significant water body issues. Policy EP1 provides for the consideration of proposals where they relate to impact on water quality and in relation to matters of environmental capacity. Consequently any proposals will be required to satisfy its provisions. Matters relating to potential biodiversity issues in relation to the site are duly noted and regard will need to be had to the provisions of Policy EQ4. Reference will need to be made to policy EP3 and the requirement for SUDS. The ordinary watercourse running along the western boundary of the site will have to be considered as part of a planning application County Ecologist: The comments made by the County Ecologist are noted and would have to be addressed at the planning application stage. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 22 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 3 0 Medium 0 3 High 3 4 Issues arise in relation to Climatic Factors and Health & Wellbeing as a result of access to services and under Population as a result of the site s IMD ranking. Opportunities: Further The site has not scored particularly highly due largely to the issues above, however, this must be taken into contet. Ffarmers forms part of a sustainable community of five separate villages. Constraints in several of these communities means that they are unsuitable to accommodate market housing. Only Caeo and Ffarmers are appropriate in sustainability terms to accommodate housing allocations. In Ffarmers, the rural qualities of the village and surrounding landscape serve as constraints on the areas where such housing allocations could be placed and so this site consequently is considered to be the most suitable location.

284 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC25/h1 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Land adj Dolau Llan, Llansawel Site Area (Ha): 0.41ha Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Partly within the development limits Relevant Planning History P6/21A/19554/92 Full planning permission for proposed gas pressure reduction station approved on 25/06/1992. This reflects a small parcel of land immediately to the east of the candidate site and adjoins the field s eastern boundary. The site itself does not have planning permission. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

285 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The settlement is largely characterised by linear development as the majority of the built-form in the village has evolved in a ribbon pattern adjoining the county roads. The candidate site is located at the east of the settlement and adjoins an eisting ribbon pattern of residential development along the county road which leads to Crugybar. The candidate site comprises part of a large field s frontage. The remainder of the field s frontage accommodates residential dwellings to the west of the site and a public utilities facility to the east of the site. The site s western boundary is defined by a wire fence and the site s eastern boundary

286 adjoins the aforementioned public utilities facility and, beyond that, the field s boundary which is defined by hedgerow and a small watercourse. The UDP development limits at the east of the settlement are not defined by any eisting boundary or topographical feature. The field s eastern boundary would provide the settlement s eastern edge with a well-defined natural boundary to the settlement and as such the inclusion of the candidate site within the development limits would provide the settlement with an improved boundary. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown An etensive area of land within Llansawel falls within the floodzone as identified on the TAN 15 Development Advice Maps which significantly reduces the area of suitable land available for

287 residential development. The candidate site does not fall within an identified floodzone as indicated in the TAN 15 Development Advice Maps. There is a narrow watercourse which adjoins a small section of the site s eastern boundary and as such the Environment Agency has noted that a buffer strip will be required between this watercourse and the developed area. These comments have been noted and the watercourse shall be protected by suitable buffer zones under Policy EP1 of the LDP. This is unlikely to impact upon the site s deliverability. The county road adjoining the site falls partly within and partly outside a 30mph zone. As such, the Carmarthenshire Highways Division have noted that this 30mph zone would need to be relocated in order to reduce the required visibility to 90m and a speed survey could be undertaken to further reduce the visibility requirements. The comments also note that due to a bend in the road there is a forward visibility issue. However, the site is of sufficient depth to accommodate an alteration to the site s frontage to reduce the bend in the road and increase forward visibility. The southern part of the settlement is located within the Cothi Valley Special Landscape Area (SLA). However, the site is located outside of the SLA separated from it by the county road which serves the village. It is considered that development on the site would not have an adverse impact upon the qualities of the SLA and could make a positive contribution to the surrounding landscape. 6. Additional The candidate site is an elongated section of agricultural land which adjoins the road travelling towards Crygubar at the east of Llansawel. The site is located immediately to the east of the residential property of Dolau Llan. There is no eisting boundary or topographical feature which defines the site s northern side. Immediately to the east of the site there is a public utilities facility and beyond that is the field boundary of hedgerow. This boundary would provide a well-defined edge to the urban form and the inclusion of the site would be a logical etension of the development limits. The eisting UDP development limits at this part of the settlement are not defined by any eisting boundary or topographical feature and an etension of the limits to the edge of the public utilities facility would be an improvement in terms of defining the edge of the settlement and in terms of providing clarity and certainty as to the settlement s boundary. There are a number of facilities in the village including a primary school, village hall, church, chapel and public house, all of which are within walking distance of the candidate site. The site contributes to the deliverability of the Plan s strategic objectives by providing sustainably located development which adjoins the eisting residential built form with good access to the wider highway network and within walking distance of a public bus-stop. In summary, the site offers an opportunity to define the settlement s eastern boundary and offers an opportunity for residential development in the village on a scale which is proportionate and inkeeping with the eisting size of the village and the facilities and services which it offers. It is considered that the benefits which the site offers as a residential allocation outweigh the resultant etension of ribbon development. For these reasons, the site is considered to be an appropriate residential allocation. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 64 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities

288 Issues Low 3 2 Medium 0 1 High 3 9 Significant issues arise in relation to Climatic Factors as a result of access to services and significant issues are noted under population as a result of the site s IMD ranking. Opportunities: Significant opportunities arise in relation to Air Quality, Climatic Factors, Material Assets, Economy, Population, Health and Wellbeing, Education and Skills and Social Fabric as a result of the site s access to public transport services, access to services in general and due to the settlement s IMD ranking. Further The issues and opportunities which arise in relation to the site are largely reflective of issues and opportunities which would affect the settlement as a whole. The site has scored comparatively well in relation to other sites within the settlement. As outlined above, there are a number of key facilities within walking distance of the site and is a comparatively sustainable site to be allocated in a rural village.

289 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC25/h2 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Land at Dolau Isaf, Rhydcymerau Site Area (Ha): 0.52ha Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Adjoins the settlement limits Relevant Planning History None 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

290 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The settlement is largely characterised by linear development as the majority of the built form in the village has evolved in a ribbon pattern adjoining the county roads. The candidate site is located in the centre of the village. There is an eisting ribbon pattern of residential development which adjoins the site to the west and there is a ribbon pattern of dwellings opposite the site to the south which are built on the UDP residential allocation CL49/a. To the east of the site is the B4337 road and beyond that are the primary school and a further ribbon pattern of residential properties which etends southwards along the road. Due to the site s size and shape it is unlikely to cater for more than single plot depth and development of the site would be likely to etend the eisting ribbon pattern of development. It is considered inappropriate to etend the site northwards to comprise the whole field in order to overcome the issue of ribbon development as allocating the whole field would result in a disproportionate amount of development which would be out of scale and character with the

291 settlement. The site offers an opportunity for development on a small scale which would represent a logical reflection of the built-up frontage located opposite the candidate site and a logical infill development between eisting built-up areas. Furthermore, as the site is already bounded by the urban form to the east and to the west there is no possibility that development on the site would instigate further development to either side. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown The following comments have been received in response to candidate site which comprises site SC25/h2 and the remainder of the field etending north from the allocation to the field s boundary (measuring 1.00ha with an indicative number of 20 dwellings). Therefore, the following comments are partly applicable to site SC25/h2.

292 CCW raised no issues. CCC Planning Ecologist: Stream Corridor, River Corridor, Grassland potentially of interest SV req to determine quality, Semi Improved Grassland on CCW Phase 1 survey. Hedgerows, Boundary Mature Trees, Bats? These comments have been noted and are issues to be considered at application stage. Unlike candidate site site SC25/h2 ecludes the river corridor and therefore development on this site would be unlikely to impact upon the river corridor. Dyfed Archaeology Trust: Category E. This site can be allocated in the LDP as it is unlikely that historic environment interests will be adversely affected by a development proposal. Environment Agency (EA): Biodiversity and Fisheries: A 7m buffer strip will be required along the watercourse. We would also enforce our embargo period for any in-river works which would run from 17 October to 17 April. The implementation of buffer strips is considered through policy EP1 of the LDP which provides that watercourses shall be safeguarded through the implementation of buffer zones where appropriate. These comments have been noted, and it is likely that the number of dwellings accommodated on the site will be reduced in order to accommodate the buffer strip. Pollution Prevention: This area lies outside the catchment of the public sewer system and we would highlight our concerns over the proliferation of small private disposal facilities. Any private facilities will require either a permit or eemption from the Environment Agency. Your Authority must ensure that this development will not cause deterioration of the water environment thus impacting on the Water Framework Directive classification. These comments have been noted and such matters will need to be addressed prior to development taking place. Flood Risk: The Afon Melindwr runs along the northern boundary of the site and another ordinary watercourse runs through the centre of the site. The nearby bridge structure could present a constriction to flows and could also alter the etent of flood risks in this area. We do not have any detailed flood map information for this location and as such we would require a detailed topographic survey together with some form of assessment of flood risks from the Afon Melindwr. No culverting will be consented unless for access purposes. We would recommend consultation with your own Drainage Engineers on this application for any knowledge on local flooding issues. The candidate site does not fall within a floodzone as identified on the TAN 15 Development Advice Maps and the EA floodzone 3 maps. A topographic survey and flood risk survey can be carried out in support of an application for the site. Groundwater and Contaminated Land: No known issues. Carmarthenshire County Council Highways Division: B class road metres required restricted visibility and forward visibility. Side road required speed survey to reduce side rd junction with B class road restricted visibility Access could be attained from the side road. A single point of access to the site would be preferable to a proliferation of individual access points. The required visibility can be attained at the site s frontage. Furthermore, the site in question is considerably smaller than the site assessed and therefore the traffic generated by residential development on the site shall be significantly less. Access would be further eplored at the planning application stage and does not have a detrimental effect upon the allocation of this site for residential purposes.

293 6. Additional The candidate site comprises part of an agricultural field which forms the field s frontage along the side road between the residential property of Dolau Isaf and the adjacent primary school. The site s east side adjoins the B4337 road and the site s southern boundary adjoins the side road travelling westwards out of Rhydcymerau towards Llanllwni. The western boundary is defined by a fence and the southern and eastern boundaries of the site are lined with hedgerow and trees. There is no eisting boundary or topographical feature to define the northern edge of the site. However, the northern edge of the site would represent a logical continuation of the eisting development limits which etend to the rear of the properties at Brodolau and to the rear of the adjoining property- Dolau-Isaf. The site could potentially accommodate 10 dwellings at 20 dwellings per hectare. However, taking into consideration the site s shape and size, the narrow ditch which crosses the site and the low density of development in the settlement the site is more likely to accommodate some 5-6 dwellings. The site is located in close proimity to the main built-up area of Rhydcymerau which is centred along the B4337 and eastwards along the road which travels towards Llanllwni and the local school is immediately adjacent to the site s north-eastern etremity. Development of the site would therefore be a logical etension of the eisting settlement and would be well-related and integrated with the eisting settlement. The site provides an opportunity for residential development in the settlement which is of an appropriate scale and is in keeping with the services and facilities which are on offer within the settlement. Furthermore, the site contributes to the deliverability of the Plan s strategic objectives by providing sustainably located development which adjoins a well-serviced public bus stop and has good access to the wider highway network which links the site to larger settlements beyond Rhydcymerau which offer a wider range of facilities and services. In summary, the site offers an opportunity for development which is well-integrated into the eisting urban form and is considered a potentially suitable site to be allocated for residential use in the LDP. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 68 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 4 2 Medium 0 4 High 3 8 Significant issues arise in relation to two sustainability topics: Climatic Factors and Population. Issues relating to climatic factors are the result of access to services and significant issues are noted under population as a result of the site s IMD ranking. Opportunities: Significant opportunities arise in relation to Air Quality, Climatic Factors, Material Assets and Social Fabric as a result of the site s access to public transport, trunk roads, cycling and pedestrian services as well as general services and facilities. Other significant opportunities arise under Health and Wellbeing, Education and Skills, Economy and Population in relation to the settlement s IMD ranking and

294 access to services. Further The issues and opportunities which arise in relation to the site are largely reflective of issues and opportunities which would affect the settlement and wider area as a whole mainly as a result of the site s rural contet. As noted above, the site has good access to the wider highway network and is within walking distance of a wellserviced public bus stop which links the site to other key facilities beyond the settlement.

295 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC25/h3 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Land adjoining Ffynnon Dawel, Talley Site Area (Ha): 0.5ha Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Allocated for residential development (CL48/b) Relevant Planning History 27/11/08 - E/ Full planning permission for 3 houses on the west side of the site. 14/05/08 - E/09983 Outline permission for residential development (resubmission of application E/06587 refused on ). 17/04/07 - E/15572 Outline permission proposed residential development undertaken as an amended scheme to that previously granted planning permission E/09983 dated (subject to section 106 agreement). At the time of visiting the site there were two dwellings under construction on the site. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy?

296 Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits) 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations:

297 General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown The whole settlement is located within a Special Landscape Area (SLA) and development within the settlement should respect the quality of its surrounding landscape. It is considered that development on the site would not have an adverse impact upon the qualities of the SLA and could make a positive contribution to the landscape. There is a tree on the site which is subject to a Tree Preservation Order and this would need to be incorporated into any development scheme. which were submitted by the Technical Officers Group in respect of the site have been noted. However, as noted above, the principle of residential development on this site has been established and the site has the benefit of an etant planning consent and was under construction at the time of visiting the site. Taking into consideration that the site has attracted a consent it is considered that there are no insurmountable issues which affect the site s

298 deliverability. Furthermore, it is considered appropriate and in the interests of certainty and clarity to allocate the site for residential development. 6. Additional The candidate site comprises part of a field which is located at the south of the settlement. To the east and north-east the site adjoins an area allocated for recreation / open space. The northern side of the site partly adjoins the road at Golwg yr Allt which provides an access point to the site and the remainder of this site boundary adjoins a track. The site s southern boundary is defined by a number of trees and hedgerow and is bounded by open countryside. The site adjoins the residential property of Ffynnon Dawel to the west. The site s edges are well-defined by eisting field boundaries thus providing the edge of the settlement with defensible boundaries. The site measures 0.5 hectares and could accommodate 10 dwellings at 20 dwellings per hectare. However, due to the site s elongated shape and the character and eisting low density within the village, the site is more likely to accommodate 7-8 dwellings. Development on the site would be well-related to the eisting residential urban form which is adjacent to the north of the site, and provides an opportunity for residential development which would not have an adverse impact upon the nearby conservation area and the general amenity of the settlement. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 32 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 5 2 Medium 1 2 High 3 6 Significant issues arise in relation to Climatic Factors and Population as a result of availability of services, access to the road network and public transport services and as a result of the site s IMD ranking. Other issues are noted in the proforma but have little impact on the site s suitability. Opportunities: Significant opportunities arise in relation to the site s access to public transport and access to other services and facilities, and also as a result of the site s IMD ranking. Further A number of the issues and opportunities which arise in relation to the site are largely reflective of issues and opportunities which would affect the settlement and sustainable community as a whole. This is a reflection of the site s rural contet and the eisting scale of the settlement and the services it offers. The site scores comparatively well in relation to other sites assessed in the settlement.

299 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC25/h4 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Land at Edwinsford Arms, Talley Site Area (Ha): 0.23ha Eisting Use* Public house and car park Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Majority of the site is located within the development limits Relevant Planning History E/00584 Full planning permission for stables 31/07/1997. E/17650 Refused application for change of use- reversion to public house from residential 21/12/2007. E/17651 Refused application for conversion restaurant/pubic house to residential (2 no. dwellings) 21/12/2007. E/17652 Withdrawn application for outline permission for residential development part affordable housing 14/01/2008. E/18376 full planning permission granted on 23/08/2011 for: 1. Road and plot layout for residential development on the current car park area and land adjoining consisting of 7 residential units in total; 2. Conversion of restaurant/public house to residential (two units); 3. Reversion to public house from residential. This application is subject to a section 106 agreement. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available.

300 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits) 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement)

301 General Planning Principles No Yes A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown The candidate site is located within an area which is a sand and gravel mineral resource safeguarding area. A large proportion of this safeguarding area is located on a Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Site (RIGS) which would significantly impact upon the site s potential to be worked for mineral etraction. By virtue of the safeguarding area s proimity to this designation and others it is unlikely that this site would be worked for mineral etraction. Accordingly, the allocation of the candidate site would not have a detrimental impact upon the

302 mineral safeguarding area s potential to be worked. There is a RIGS located to the north-west of the site. Taking into account that the site is separated from this designation by the B4302 road and a small parcel of land it is considered that development can be conducted on site without having an adverse impact upon the designation. The site is located within a conservation area which encompasses the western part of the settlement and the building on the site, which has recently been used as a public house, is a listed building (listed building record no.15770). Development on the site would need to be of a design which reinforces and respects the character of the area and the listed building. This does not present an issue which would impact upon the site s deliverability but is a consideration at planning application stage. As part of application E/18376 this building has been proposed for conversion into two dwellings and as such the character of the listed buildings and its setting has been taken into account. The whole settlement is located within a Special Landscape Area (SLA) and development within the settlement should respect the quality of its surrounding landscape. It is considered that development on the site would not have an adverse impact upon the qualities of the SLA and could make a positive contribution to the landscape. The majority of the site is previously developed land and inclusion of the site would etend the development limits to the north to include an area which is gravelled and used as a car park which previously accommodated stables. There are a number of large trees which define the site s northern boundary and these screen the site approaching from the north. It is considered that development on the site would not have a significant visual effect on the settlement. Taking into consideration that the site has attracted planning consent it is considered that there are no insurmountable issues which affect the site s deliverability. 6. Additional The site comprises the Edwinsford Arms public house and car park. The majority of the site is located within the Unitary Development Plan (UDP) development limits and a small section measuring 0.08 hectares etends northwards beyond the development limits. There is no physical boundary or topographical feature which separates the areas inside and outside of the UDP development limits. The site s northern boundary adjoins open countryside. However, as noted above, the site is defined and well-screened from the north by a number of large trees and it is considered that further residential development on the site would not visually affect the settlement s northern gateway. Furthermore, it is considered that the site s northern boundary would provide a more suitable settlement boundary than the eisting UDP development limits as it would provide a welldefined and defensible boundary to the settlement. The site s eastern boundary adjoins the rear of residential properties at Maes Celyn and it is considered that development on the eastern part of the site would be well-related to this eisting residential urban form. The site s western boundary is defined by the B4302 road. The site s southern boundary lies between the public house on the site and a residential dwelling to the south which is proposed to be reverted to a public house. The site has a number of advantages in terms of allocating for residential development- the site is previously developed in part, development on the site would not cause significant alterations in terms of visual impact, and it is well-related to the adjoining residential estate of Maes Celyn.

303 There is an eisting vehicular access point to the site directly from the B4302 on the site s western boundary. This access point is considered to be suitable to accommodate the development proposed under application E/ As noted above, the principle of residential development on this site has been established and the site has the benefit of an etant planning consent. It is therefore considered appropriate and in the interests of certainty and clarity to allocate the site for residential development. Furthermore, the proposed development would be beneficial as it would provide an element of affordable housing within the settlement limits. For these reasons it is recommended that the site is allocated for residential development. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 10 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 2 2 Medium 2 2 High 3 4 Significant issues arise in relation to Climatic Factors and Population as a result of the availability of services and access to the road network and public transport services and as a result of the site s IMD ranking. Other issues relating to cultural heritage and landscape arise as a result of the site s location within a Special Landscape Area, and proimity to a Scheduled Ancient Monument, Conservation Area, Listed Buildings and Countryside Rights of Way. Opportunities: Significant opportunities arise in relation to a number of sustainability themes, however, these opportunities arise in relation to the site s access to public transport and access to other services and facilities, and also as a result of the site s IMD ranking. Further A number of the issues and opportunities which arise in relation to the site are largely reflective of issues and opportunities which would affect the settlement as a whole. This is a reflection of the site s rural contet and the eisting scale of the settlement and the services it offers. The site scores lower than the other sites assessed within the settlement due to its proimity to Scheduled Ancient Monument, Conservation Area and Listed Buildings. However, as noted above, it is considered that development on the site can be achieved without having an adverse impact on these designated areas.

304 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC25/h5 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Land adjoining Dyffryn Glas, Talley Site Area (Ha): 0.4ha Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Allocated for residential development (CL48/a) Relevant Planning History The site was allocated for residential development in the UDP for an indicative number of 8 dwellings. The site does not have a current planning permission for residential development. Outline consent (Ref. P6/28/7922/82) was granted on 17/05/1982 for the development of 2 dwellings. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

305 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value There is an eisting pattern of ribbon development along the B4302 road in Talley and as the site can only cater for single plot depth, development on the site would contribute to this pattern. However, this pattern of development would be in keeping with the eisting character of development and would represent a logical infill of the urban residential form. As such, development of the site would be in accordance with national policy guidance as set out in paragraph of Edition 4 of Planning Policy Wales (2011). Furthermore, due to the site s location between eisting residential properties development on this site would not eacerbate or etend the ribbon pattern of development and would not instigate further linear development.

306 Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown There are no known biodiversity issues which affect the site s deliverability. As part of the site s assessment Carmarthenshire County Council Highways Division have noted that visibility splays at the site may possibly be restricted due to a bend in the road. This could potentially affect sections of the site s frontage and as a result the number of dwellings which could be suitably accommodated on this site may be reduced in order to take account of this. The Highways Division have also noted that development on the site may result in displaced parking. This comment has been noted and this shall be considered at application stage when assessing the site s layout. There is a conservation area located to the north-west of the site which comprises the western

307 part of the settlement and etends eastwards to comprise the Maes Celyn residential estate. However, there is sufficient distance between the candidate site and the conservation area to allow development to occur in a way which would not impact upon the designated area and take account of the area s character and qualities. The Environment Agency has noted that a detailed flood risk assessment may be required prior to developing the site. These comments have been noted and it is considered that if further flood risk assessments are required that this should be carried out in support of any proposal at the planning application stage. The TAN 15 Development Advice Maps and the EA national floodzone 3 maps indicate that the site is not affected by flood risk and it is considered unsuitable to eclude the site from the development limits on this basis. The whole settlement is located within a Special Landscape Area (SLA) and development within the settlement should respect the quality of its surrounding landscape. It is considered that development on the site would not have an adverse impact upon the qualities of the SLA and could make a positive contribution to the landscape. 6. Additional The candidate site comprises part of a field which at the time of visiting the site was used for grazing. The southern side of the site adjoins the main road (B4302) which travels through Talley and is located between the residential properties of Ystrad and Dyffryn Glas which form part of a ribbon pattern of development. The northern side of the site is not defined by any eisting boundary or topographical feature but the boundary forms a clear and logical continuation of the eisting development limits which are to the rear of the adjoining properties. Taking into consideration the density of development opposite and adjoining the site the site could accommodate approimately up to 8 dwellings which would adjoin the main road. However, as noted above, this number may be reduced in order to take account of the potential restricted visibility along the site s frontage. The site is bounded by residential development to the south, east and west and it is considered that development on the site would be well-related to the eisting residential urban form and provides an opportunity to develop the site in a way which compliments the adjoining development. The site is in close proimity to the primary school which is located to the east of the site, and to the bus stop which is located to the west of the site and is therefore well-placed in relation to the services available within the settlement. The site provides an opportunity for residential development which would be in keeping with the eisting scale of development and would be proportionate to the eisting size of the settlement. The inclusion of the site represents an acceptable etension of the urban form in a manner which reflects the amenity and character of the area. It is recommended that the site is retained as a residential allocation. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 19 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 4 3 Medium 1 1 High 3 5 Significant issues arise in relation to Climatic Factors and Population in connection

308 with availability of services, access to the road network and public transport, and as a result of the site s IMD ranking. Other issues are noted in the proforma but have little impact on the site s suitability. Opportunities: Significant opportunities arise in relation to a number of sustainability themes, however, these relate to the site s access to public transport, access to other services and facilities, and as a result of the site s IMD ranking. Further A number of the issues and opportunities which arise in relation to the site are largely reflective of issues and opportunities which would affect the settlement as a whole. This is a reflection of the site s rural contet and the eisting scale of the settlement and the services it offers. The settlement is linked by public transport to the nearby service centre of Llandeilo which offers a range of services and facilities, including employment opportunities. There are no issues which arise in relation to the sustainability of the site which would justify ecluding the site from the development limits.

309 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC26/h1 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Caegof, Lampeter Road Site Area (Ha): Eisting Use* Housing: site complete Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Residential Allocation CL36/a Relevant Planning History The site is complete. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

310 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and No Yes?

311 increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site is complete. The final 8 units completed during the Plan period contributes towards the residential allocation figure contained within the Deposit LDP. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

312 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC28/h1 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Adj. Bronhaul Site Area (Ha): Eisting Use* Vacant Land Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Part of Residential Allocation CL37/a Relevant Planning History Current planning application (E/20540) for 26 semi-detached dwellings. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

313 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? No Yes?

314 Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site forms a vacant area of land immediately adjacent to an eisting housing estate. The site has a number of advantages in terms of retention as a residential allocation no notable constraints, and is only a short distance along the main A483 from the amenities and services of Llandovery. Cynghordy also lies on the strategic rail artery linking West Wales with Shrewsbury (the Heart of Wales Line). In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement and will enable this small outlying village close to Llandovery to be sustained over the Plan period. Furthermore, there is currently a planning application in for a housing development at the site. It

315 must be noted that the size of the allocation has been reduced from that allocated within the UDP to reflect the size and character of the settlement itself. The current application relates to the new, reduced area. The Local Planning Authority consider that the designation of this site is appropriate to ensure that sufficient land has been allocated within the LDP for residential development purposes in accordance with Planning Policy Wales. In conclusion this available land can be put forward as a residential allocation within the LDP. The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below. Response to TOG comments: EA: The potential for capacity issues is noted however discussions/consultations remain on going with Dwr Cymru which together with appropriate phasing etc does not preclude deliverability during the plan period. In light of the EA s comments relating to potential flood risk, a minimum FCA will need to be submitted in support of any future applications as a precautionary measure. County Ecologist: made by the County Ecologist are duly noted. Such matters will need to be addressed in relation to the relevant policies of the Plan prior to development taking place. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 42 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 5 2 Medium 1 6 High 4 6 Issues arise in relation to Climatic Factors as a result of access to services and under Population as a result of the site s IMD ranking. Opportunities: Further No notable Issues. The site does not score particularly highly mainly due to the above issues. However, this must be taken into contet. Cynghordy s location net to the main A483, linking West Wales with Mid and North Wales, and it s location along the Heart of Wales Railway linking West Wales with the Midlands, as well as its close proimity to the services and amenities of neighbouring Llandovery results in the settlement being more suitable and sustainable in

316 planning terms to accommodate a market housing allocation than many other of the more remote settlements in the County.

317 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC30/h1 Site Ref (where applicable): Part of Location: Land Opp Village Hall Site Area (Ha): Eisting Use* Agricultural Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Part of site formed Residential Allocation CL34/a Relevant Planning History Part of the site (i.e. that part forming the allocation in the UDP, opp. Village Hall) was granted outline planning permission (subject to the signing of a S.106) on 12/1/11 E/ Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

318 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General No Yes?

319 Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site has a number of advantages in terms of its suitability for residential use close to the local amenities and services of the settlement, integrated to the eisting residential built form and with good access and highway links. The settlement lies adjacent to the strategic A40 which links West Wales with the Midlands. In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement. Furthermore, part of the site has been granted outline planning permission, subject to the signing of a S.106. The principle of this part of the site for residential development has therefore been

320 considered acceptable. This part of the site, together with the additional area making up the allocation SC30/h1 will serve to cater for the housing needs of this settlement as well as the others within the sustainable community (SC30) over the Plan period. In conclusion this available land can be put forward as a residential allocation within the LDP. The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below. Response to TOG comments: EA: There are currently no significant water body issues. Policy EP1 provides for the consideration of proposals where they relate to impact on water quality and in relation to matters of environmental capacity. Consequently any proposals will be required to satisfy its provisions. Reference will need to be made to policy EP3 and the requirement for SUDS. County Ecologist: made by the County Ecologist in respect of hedgerows are duly noted. Such matters will need to be addressed in relation to the relevant policies of the Plan prior to development taking place. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 8 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 3 6 Medium 2 3 High 5 14 Issues arise in relation to Climatic Factors and Health & Wellbeing as a result of access to services and under Population as a result of the site s IMD ranking. Opportunities: Further The site has scored poorly in terms of sustainability appraisal, partially because of the high quality landscape environment in which it is located within a SLA. Several other issues contribute to the negative score as pointed out above, however, this must be taken into contet. Cwmifor forms part of a sustainable community of eight separate villages. Constraints in several of these communities means that they are unsuitable to accommodate market housing. Only three villages, including Cwmifor, are appropriate in sustainability terms to accommodate housing allocations. In Cwmifor, topography and landscape value constrain the areas where such allocations could be placed and so this site consequently is the most suitable location. Furthermore, part of the site represents a consented commitment.

321 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC30/h2 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Caebach, Penybanc Site Area (Ha): Eisting Use* Site under construction Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? White land within development limits. Relevant Planning History Reserved Matters planning permission (E/17785) for 5 dwellings granted on 31/1/ Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

322 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and No Yes?

323 increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site is close to the local amenities and services of the settlement, and well integrated with the eisting residential built form. In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement. Furthermore, the site has a full planning permission and construction of the dwellings has already commenced. The principle and detailed assessment of the site for residential development has therefore been considered acceptable. In conclusion this available land can be put forward as a residential allocation within the LDP. The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.

324 Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: -62 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 3 6 Medium 3 4 High 4 6 Issues arise in relation to Climatic Factors and Health & Wellbeing as a result of access to services and under Population as a result of the site s IMD ranking. Opportunities: Further The site has scored poorly in terms of sustainability appraisal, partially because of the high quality landscape environment in which it is located within a SLA. Several other issues contribute to the negative score as pointed out above, however, this must be taken into contet. Penybanc forms part of a sustainable community of eight separate villages, only three of which (including Penybanc) have housing allocations. In Penybanc, topography and landscape value constrain the areas where such allocations could be placed and so this site consequently is the only suitable location. The site also has a full planning permission and therefore represents a consented commitment. Penybanc also benefits in sustainability terms from being located close to the Tier 2 settlement of Llandeilo and the strategic A40 trunk road.

325 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC30/h3 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Frontage north of Golwg Y Gar Site Area (Ha): Eisting Use* Agricultural Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Part allocated as a Planning and Development Brief (PDB44) Relevant Planning History No 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

326 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality No Yes?

327 Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional It is not proposed to allocate planning and development brief sites in the LDP. UDP site PDB44, which includes this site, is too large to be allocated for residential development and would be out of scale with the eisting form and character of the settlement. A large portion of the PDB has consequently been removed from development limits in the Deposit LDP. The development limits have been cropped back to the road frontage along Golwg y Gar between the properties of Hen Berllan and Gorianfach and this has been put forward as a residential allocation in the LDP. This would ensure adequate fleibility for the housing requirements of the settlement over the LDP period. The site has a number of advantages in terms of retention as a residential allocation being close to the local amenities and services of the settlement, integrated to the eisting residential built form and with good access and highway links and free from any obvious constraints. In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement.

328 The Local Planning Authority consider that the designation of this site is appropriate to ensure that sufficient land has been allocated within the LDP for residential development purposes in accordance with Planning Policy Wales. In conclusion this available land can be put forward as a residential allocation within the LDP. The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below. TOG comments: Note: TOG comments received were in relation to a larger area than that now represented in the frontage allocation. EA: There are currently no significant water body issues. Policy EP1 provides for the consideration of proposals where they relate to impact on water quality and in relation to matters of environmental capacity. Consequently any proposals will be required to satisfy its provisions. County Ecologist & CCW: relating to potential biodiversity issues in relation to the site made by both the County Ecologist and the CCW are duly noted. The site has since been reduced in size and no longer incorporates the pond and mature trees. Nevertheless, regard will need to be had to the provisions of EQ4 and all other relevant policies contained within the Plan prior to any development taking place, as part of a planning application. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 43 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 1 4 Medium 0 0 High 3 7 Issues arise in relation to Climatic Factors as a result of access to services and under Population as a result of the site s IMD ranking. Opportunities: Further Whilst the site has not scored particularly well in terms of SA, this must be taken into contet. Salem forms part of a sustainable community of eight separate villages, only three of which (including Salem) have been deemed suitable to accommodate housing allocations. In Salem, topography and landscape value constrain the areas where such allocations could be placed and so this site

329 consequently is the only suitable location. This site will contribute towards the housing requirements of the settlement, and sustainable community of which it forms a part, over the Plan period.

330 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC31/H1 Site Ref (where applicable): CS0548 Location: Pantyffynnon, OS5227 Site Area (Ha): 0.84ha Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Adjoins the UDP settlement limits Relevant Planning History P6/20/6443/80 2/10/1980 Refusal of permission for residential development on part enclosure 5227 Pantyffynnon, Cwrt Henri. The application site is an elongated section of the field which reflects the road frontage of the candidate site. The application was refused on the basis that the site was located outside the development limits and development would result in a ribbon pattern of development. E/ /03/1999 Full planning permission granted for the construction of 4 bungalows and road (renewal of application no. P6/18A/208/94 approved on 19/5/94) at Cwrt Glasfryn which immediately adjoins the candidate site s south-east side. E/ /3/2005 Full planning permission granted for the construction of 2 detached houses at no. 2 & 3 Cwrt Glasfryn which immediately adjoins the candidate site s south-east side. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy)

331 Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits) 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value

332 Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown Highways have made the following comments: required may require to relocate 30mph zone 5.5 carriageway width 1.8 footways footway frontage. The majority of the site s road frontage is located within a 30mph zone, however, a section of the site s north-western etremity falls outside the speed restriction. Therefore, as noted by Highways, there may be a requirement to relocate the 30mph zone. This is considered to be achievable and is not considered to be an issue which affects the site s deliverability. There is a footpath which links the school in the settlement to the adjoining built-up area to the

333 north. This footpath currently etends as far as the residential property of Ardwyn to the south of the candidate site. If the site was developed for residential use the development may necessitate etending the footpath further north in order to link the candidate site to the school. The village is located on a well-serviced bus route which stops at the Maes Awelon housing estate which is approimately 100m to the south of the candidate site. There are no known biodiversity issues or constraints which would affect the site s deliverability. The site was sent to the Technical Officers Group for assessment as to its suitability and no objections were raised. 6. Additional The candidate site is located to the north of the development limits in Cwrt Henri. The site comprises the main part of an agricultural field which at the time of visit was used for grazing. The south east side of the site adjoins the eisting built-up area of Cwrt Glasfryn which is a recent residential development of 3 dwellings, the south west side adjoins the main road which travels through Cwrt Henri. There is no eisting boundary or topographical feature which defines the north east side of the site, however, if the whole field was developed for residential use the scale of the development would be disproportionate to the eisting size of the settlement. The site s boundary roughly coincides with the edge of the recent development at Cwrt Glasfryn and the boundary is therefore considered to be a logical continuation of the eisting residential urban form. It is considered that development of the site would be well-integrated with the residential development of Cwrt Glasfryn and the Maes Awelon residential estate beyond that. The site measures 0.84 hectares and could potentially accommodate 16 dwellings at 20 dwellings per hectare. However, taking into consideration the low density and the character of the adjoining development the site would be better suited to accommodate some dwellings. Development of the site would be a logical etension of the eisting built-up area of Cwrt Henri. There are a number of eisting services and facilities within Cwrt Henri which contribute towards a sustainable community. There is a primary school, a public house, a shop/post office, church with a hall and a chapel located in the settlement of Cwrt Henri which are within walking distance of the site. It is therefore considered that there are sufficient facilities and services available in the settlement to support the scale of development which could be accommodated on the candidate site. The site contributes to the deliverability of the Plan s strategic objectives by providing sustainably located development which would be a logical etension of the eisting built form. The south west boundary of the site, which adjoins the main road, is lined by a number of mature trees which would need to be incorporated into any development scheme for the site. Other than that, the candidate site performs well against the criteria set in part 2b of the proforma and the site is therefore potentially suitable for residential development. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 86 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Low 4 0 Medium 1 1

334 Issues High 3 12 Significant issues arise in relation to the settlement s IMD ranking and access to services, however, these issues would be likely to affect any site within the settlement. Other considerations are related to the proimity of landscape features namely a Special Landscape Area, Tree Preservation Orders and Historic Landscape Area. These issues are reflective of the site s rural contet and would be likely to affect any sites located within or in close proimity of the main residential urban form in Cwrt Henri. Opportunities: There are a number of significant opportunities which arise in relation to the site. These fall under a number of sustainability themes- air quality, climatic factors, material assets, population, health and wellbeing, education and skills, economy and social fabric. However, each of these opportunities arise in relation to possibilities to improve access to services and public transport and with regard to opportunities to improve the settlement s IMD ranking. Further The issues and opportunities which arise in relation to the site are largely reflective of issues and opportunities which would affect the settlement and sustainable community as a whole as a result of its rural contet. The site scores comparatively well to other sites assessed within the sustainable community, and scores significantly better than the other residential allocations within SC31.

335 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC31/h2 Site Ref (where applicable): SC31/h2 Location: Llanarthne CP School and adjoining grounds Site Area (Ha): 0.48 ha Eisting Use* School Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? No. Relevant Planning History W/ Outline application for a proposed residential development of approimately 8 no dwelling houses Granted 03/03/ Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

336 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The site is located on the north western edge of the settlement with a road frontage along the U2191 which leads to Ger y Llan estate, Llanarthne. The land in question has previously been used as Llanarthne Primary School. It has an outline permission for approimately 8 dwellings. The site was taken to the Technical Officer Group for consideration. No objections were made to the inclusion of the site. The site has been through the SA process, details of which are further down the pro forma.

337 Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: -35 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 6 6 Medium 3 2 High 4 10 Landscape features 1 Historic Landscape Area and 1 Special Landscape Area Issues include location within proimity to landscape and cultural heritage features; however they do not impact directly on those features

338 See scorecard for further details Opportunities: Good access to community hall, shops and post office Good access to public transport Opportunities within SA Objective Health and well being and social fabric Further Site scores poorly due to its location near to important Landscape and cultural heritage features.

339 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: CL41/c Site Ref (where applicable): SC31/h3 Location: Adjacent to Golwg y Twr Site Area (Ha): 0.64 hectares Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Yes Relevant Planning History No relevant planning history 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

340 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The eisting housing allocation CL41/c represents a small field adjacent to the housing site known as Golwg y Twr, which is located on the eastern side of the settlement. The site has defensible boundaries and development. The site would be well integrated with and connected to the eisting settlement pattern and in conjunction with National Planning Policy. It is considered that the site would not have any adverse impact on the amenity of neighbouring properties. In conjunction with the candidate site methodology it is considered that the site performs well in relation to the requirements of Phase 2b. The site equates to 0.64 hectares and based on the Urban Housing Capacity Study, it is considered that 12 dwellings could be developed on the site. The site has been through the Technical Officers Group.

341 The EA have stated that the area lies outside the catchment of the public sewer system and they would highlight their concerns over the proliferation of small private disposal facilities. They would also state that the site is on the fringe of the fluvial flood outline. They would request a topographical survey for any proposed application, however they do not object to the allocation of this site within the LDP. No concerns have been raised by the Planning Ecologist and the CCW have not objected to the inclusion of this site. Access to the site will be via Golwg y Twr, and the Head of Transport has not objected to the proposal. The site has been through the SA process, details of which are found further down the pro forma NB. Reference should be made to the Council s schedule of focused changes which has direct implications for this Deposit LDP allocation. Particular regard should be given to the Council s response to Deposit LDP representation reference D6142 in relation to flood risk. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport

342 Cycle ways and/or footpaths No Yes Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: -26 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 6 5 Medium 4 1 High 4 12 Landscape features 1 Historic Landscape Area and 1 Special Landscape Area See scorecard for further details Opportunities: Good access to community hall, shops and post office Good access to public transport Opportunities within SA Objective Health and well being and social fabric Further Site scores poorly due to its location near to important Landscape features

343 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: CL41/b Site Ref (where applicable): SC31/h4 Location: Adjacent to Capel Saron Site Area (Ha): 0.42 hectares Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? No. Relevant Planning History No relevant planning history 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

344 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The eisting housing allocation CL41/b represents a small field adjacent to Capel Saron, which is located on the eastern etremity of the village. The site has defensible boundaries and development would be contained by the Chapel and its environs. The site would be well integrated with and connected to the eisting settlement pattern and in conjunction with National Planning Policy. Access to the site will be via the main road, and the Head of Transport has not indicated any adverse observations. In conjunction with the candidate site methodology it is considered that the site performs well in relation to the requirements of Phase 2b. It is considered that 8 dwellings could be developed on the site and represents an acceptable density within this settlement.

345 The site has been through the Technical Officers Group. The EA have stated that the area lies outside the catchment of the public sewer system and they would highlight their concerns over the proliferation of small private disposal facilities. They would also state that parts of the site are within the fluvial flood outline. They would request a minimum FCA for any proposed application, however they do not object to the allocation of this site within the LDP. No concerns have been raised by the Planning Ecologist and the CCW have not objected to the inclusion of this site. Should any development take place at this site, then it would have to be designed as an in-depth development due to the fact that frontage development only would create the appearance of ribbon development which would not be in keeping with the character of the area. The site has been through the SA process, details of which are found further down the pro forma. NB: Update 10/05/13. Reference should be made to the Council s schedule of focused changes which has direct implications for this Deposit LDP allocation. Particular regard should be given to the Council s response to deposit LDP representation reference D6142 (flood risk). The removal of the rear of the site from the allocation due the flood risk area has meant that any form of development would result in ribbon development away from the village towards Capel Saron. In this regard the potential for a development without clearly defined boundaries together with concerns over delivery would not be considered appropriate for this area, resulting in a focused change being proposed on this site. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown

346 Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: -13 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 4 6 Medium 2 1 High 4 12 Landscape features 1 Historic Landscape Area and 1 Special Landscape Area See scorecard for further details Opportunities: Good access to community hall, shops and post office Good access to public transport Opportunities within SA Objective Health and well being and social fabric Further Site scores poorly due to its location near to important Landscape features

347 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC31/h5 Site Ref (where applicable): SC31/h5 Location: Opposite Ger y Llan Site Area (Ha): 0.2 ha Eisting Use* Agricultural Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Yes Relevant Planning History Various planning permissions for residential developments 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits) 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis

348 Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The site is located on the north western edge of the settlement with a road frontage along the U2191 which leads to Ger y Llan estate, Llanarthne. The site forms as linear development along this road. The JHLAS 2007 and 2008 indicate that there were plots remaining for 5 dwellings, and this is carried forward within the Plan since the base date is April 1 st A number of these have now been completed and the remainder have planning permission. The site has been through the SA process, details of which are further down the pro forma. NB: Update 10/05/13 Recent planning permissions have meant that only 4 plots have been granted permission on the site, without space for a 5 th dwelling. In this respect there is a focused change in order to remove the site from Appendi 3 and introduce the figure of 4 dwellings into the small site contribution table.

349 Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

350 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: -42 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 8 6 Medium 4 2 High 4 10 Landscape features 1 Historic Landscape Area and 1 Special Landscape Area Issues include location within proimity to landscape and cultural heritage features; however they do not impact directly on those features See scorecard for further details Opportunities: Good access to community hall, shops and post office Good access to public transport Opportunities within SA Objective Health and well being and social fabric Further Site scores poorly due to its location near to important Landscape and cultural heritage features adjacent to the site.

351 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC32/h1 Site Ref (where applicable): SC32/h1 Location: Llwynddewi Road Site Area (Ha): 0.62 ha Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Yes CL42/a Relevant Planning History The site has no relevant planning history. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

352 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The candidate site is located within the settlement boundary as identified by the CUDP. The eastern side of the site has an immediate natural boundary with the C2069. The site is in agricultural form. Capel Dewi represents a linear settlement centred around the B4300 and the C2069 and therefore represent a ribbon form of development. The dwellings located within Capel Dewi are typically detached, and large single storey and two storey constructions.

353 With respect to this eisting H1 housing allocation site, the land forms an area of 0.62ha with a road frontage of 161m. Since the dwellings within the area are large in nature it is considered that the construction of smaller houses within an increased density would not be in keeping with the character of the area. Although the site forms as a ribbon development, this urban form is etremely common within Capel Dewi. The site has a defensible boundary on all sides by virtue of hedgerow and therefore the development of new dwellings would integrate seamlessly into the settlement. It is considered that the site offers no adverse impact which would affect the delivery of new housing. Based on the consultation with the technical officer group, there are no adverse impacts which object to the inclusion of this site within the Local Development Plan. In conclusion, and based on eisting densities with the area, this site offers the potential of developing 8 dwellings. The site was put through the SA process, details of which are at the end of this pro forma. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads)

354 Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths No Yes Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: -33 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 3 0 Medium 2 2 High 4 10 Landscape Features adjacent to site 1 Historic Landscape Area 1 Special Landscape Area Low rank for access to services Opportunities: Close to Community Hall Close to National Cycle Network Route Close to Public transport Links Further Scores low due to landscape designation adjacent to site, however site located within centre of settlement thus contributing to social fabric of the community

355 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: ACS Site Ref (where applicable): SC32/h2 Location: Land to the rear of the former joinery Site Area (Ha): 1.52 Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Part of the site is located within the development limits (frontage), remainder is located outside limits and within the Tywi Valley Special Landscape Area. Relevant Planning History Outline planning permission on part of the site granted (ref: E/20034) 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

356 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

357 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site is located in the centre of the village and has direct access off the B4310. To the south west of the site lies a former joinery and associated yard which has been granted outline planning permission for residential development in 2008 (ref E/20034). The field is level and is currently in agricultural use. The principle of residential use on the frontage of the site has been established by the recent planning application and the remainder is situated within the development limits. For these reasons, an in-depth development is considered to be more appropriate at this location and the allocation of this field would enable this. In conclusion, it is considered appropriate to allocate the site for residential development, suitable for 30 dwellings (at a density of 20 dph). 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: -124 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities

358 Issues Low Medium High The main issue of this site is that it is located adjacent to a historic landscape area and a scheduled ancient monument Opportunities: Site is located close to facilities such as recycling centre, national cycle network & nearest PROW. Site is also located close to GP surgery & community hall. Further Although the site scores negatively it is understood to be as a result of the closeness of the site to the Scheduled Ancient Monument. All sites within the settlement score negatively. It is considered appropriate to allocate the site for residential use. See score card for further detail. 8. Technical Officer Group Dyfed Archaeological Trust Category C - The proposed allocation and development of this site may impact adversely on an important heritage asset, which is unlikely to be of such importance that allocation cannot proceed. However, prior to the determination of a planning application this site should be assessed/evaluated to determine more precisely the character and etent of the heritage asset. Highways Biodiversity Officer Environment Agency No observations. Removal of hedgerow will assist visibility splays for neighbours. Adequate visibility splays can be achieved for the development. Minor aquifer. Hedgerows. Biodiversity & Fisheries: No known issue. Pollution Prevention: We would raise concerns over the capacity of pumping station and its ability to cope with any additional flows. Is it sustainable to continue to pump to Pontargothi works? Not within AMP5 improvement programme. Your Authority must ensure that this development will not cause deterioration of the water environment thus impacting on the Water Framework Directive classification. We would recommend consultation with DCWW regarding possible feasibility studies to ensure hydraulic and biological capacity and possible phasing of development. Flood Risk: No known issues. Groundwater & Contaminated Land: No known issues. Photos: Nantgaredig 16 Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

359

360 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC32/h3 Site Ref (where applicable): / CS0162 Location: UDP site CL42d Pontargothi Site Area (Ha): 0.6 Eisting Use* *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Allocated for residential use (12 units) Relevant Planning History Various applications submitted for the site, of significance are E/19646 for 20 dwellings Section 70 Finally Disposed of February 2009 ; E/ dwellings on whole site (resubmission of E/19646), Outline permission granted subject to the applicant signing a S106, which has not yet been signed. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

361 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

362 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site is currently allocated in the UDP for residential development and outline planning permission has recently been granted on the site, subject to the applicant signing a S106, which has not yet been signed. The site lies in the centre of the village, close to all the amenities. It also lies in close proimity to the C2 flood zone. Taking into account that the site has planning permission, it is appropriate for this allocation to remain as such in the LDP. The site density should be increased to reflect the recently approved permission for 15 dwellings on the site. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: -38 Score Summary Count Issues Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues appear to relate to the distance from the railway line and that the site is

363 adjoining the Special landscape Area. Opportunities: Close to the national cycle network, and facilities such as the community hall and GP surgery. Further See score card for further detail. 8. Technical Officer Group Dyfed Archaeological Trust Category C - The proposed allocation and development of this site may impact adversely on an important heritage asset, which is unlikely to be of such importance that allocation cannot proceed. However, prior to the determination of a planning application this site should be assessed/evaluated to determine more precisely the character and etent of the heritage asset. Highways Biodiversity Officer Environment Agency Accessed off A40 Trunk Road. Consult with Welsh Assembly Government s Trunk Road Advisor. Small part of site C2 and flood zone 2. Minor aquifer. See planning application E/22039 and bat assessment. Scattered mature trees and hedgerow, otter survey/river corridor undertaken for application E/ Biodiversity & Fisheries: We will request a 7m buffer to protect the river Cothi. Pollution Prevention: We would raise concerns over the capacity of pumping station and its ability to cope with any additional flows. Not within AMP5 improvement programme. Your Authority must ensure that this development will not cause deterioration of the water environment thus impacting on the Water Framework Directive classification. We would recommend consultation with DCWW regarding possible feasibility studies to ensure hydraulic and biological capacity and possible phasing of development. Flood Risk: Major flood risk. We would have significant concerns regarding the inclusion of the western part of this parcel of land, which is likely to be affected to a significant etent during an etreme flood event within the Cothi catchment. The downstream bridge structure would also influence flood levels in this area. The eastern half of this parcel of land may be suitable for development subject to the completion of a flood consequence assessment with site specific detailed hydraulic modelling which takes account of revised and updated predicted etreme flows within the catchment. We would advise that the site allocation boundary is amended to eclude the flood risk area (including those flood risk areas associated with access & egress) as the current allocation would be contrary to National Policy and could potentially make the plan unsound. Groundwater & Contaminated Land: No known issues. Photos: Pontargothi 13, 14, 15 Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

364 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: CL31/d Site Ref (where applicable): CL31/d SC33/h1 Location: Land Opposite Village Hall, Llanddarog Site Area (Ha): 1.12ha Eisting Use* Vacant Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Yes CL31/d Relevant Planning History There is no relevant planning history 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

365 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The site is an eisting housing allocation within the UDP. It is a parcel of agricultural land which is undeveloped and the site would be accessed from the main through road in Llanddarog. The development limits boundaries are in line with the eisting physical features on the site which separates the agricultural land with the urban form to the south east and the open countryside to the south west and north west. The site has not yet been delivered within the UDP. The site was submitted to the Technical Officers Group for consideration. The EA offered no objection to the site.

366 The Planning Ecologist states that a loss of hedgerow would be required at the front of the site, however no objection was given. The CCW have offered no comment. The Head of Transport has offered no objection, however some highway works would need to be carried out. A sympathetically designed site could provide the required apportionment of housing within Llanddarog. The site is located within the eisting urban form, therefore it would not have an adverse impact on the main focal points of the village, particularly those within the conservation area. The site has been through the SA process, details of which are highlighted below. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths

367 Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 133 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 5 3 Medium 0 7 High 4 14 Please see scorecard for breakdown of issues Opportunities: Located within the centre of the village and within close proimity to A48 (T) Promotes sustainable economic growth and within proimity to education facilities For further comments please see scorecard. Further

368 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: CS1377 Site Ref (where applicable): SC33/h2 Location: Land off Is y Llan, Llanddarog Site Area (Ha): 0.23ha Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Yes CL31/e Relevant Planning History There is no relevant planning history 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

369 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The site is an eisting housing allocation within the UDP. It is a vacant parcel of land which is undeveloped and is accessed via the Is y Llan estate. The development limit boundaries are in line with the eisting physical features on the site which separates the vacant land with the agricultural land. The site has little or no value to open space and environmental amenity. The candidate site rounds off the urban form within the estate. The site was taken to the Technical Officers Group. Dyfed Archaeological Trust has identified the site as a category E.

370 The EA offered no objection to the site. The Planning Ecologist and the Countryside Council for Wales have offered no objection. The Head of Transport has offered no objection. The site is located within the eisting urban form, and would not be an encroachment into the countryside. In conclusion this site can be put forward as a residential allocation within the LDP. The site was put through the SA process, details of which are highlighted below. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths

371 Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 75 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 3 13 Medium 1 0 High 3 10 See scorecard for issues details Opportunities: See scorecard for breakdown of opportunity comments Further

372 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: ACS Site Ref (where applicable): SC33/h3 Location: Rear of Ysgoldy, Bethlehem, Porthyrhyd Site Area (Ha): 1.8ha Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? No Relevant Planning History There is no relevant planning history 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

373 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The deliberation of this site as an allocation has been considered given the lack of acceptable sites within Porthyrhyd, and the removal of the eisting UDP site at Cwm Catti from the LDP. This is due to the fact that the site lies within the C2 flood risk zone as delineated by Development Advice Maps in TAN15. As a consequence a sustainable community such as Porthyrhyd is identified as having the potential to embrace an apportionment of new development. As the settlement is constrained by the C1 and C2 flood zone, the site at the rear off Ysgoldy provides one of few potential sites for development. The settlement of Porthyrhyd is directly on the A48 (T) which results in ecellent transport links along the South Wales transport corridor.

374 The site was taken to the Technical Officers Group and a number of responses have been received. The EA states that the proposed allocation lies partially within the C2 zone as advised by DAM maps. Further information is also provided regarding the access and egress to the site. In response, the site has been reduced in size to only consider the area of land outside the flood zone. The Head of Transport would require highway improvements to be made if the development was to take place. Dyfed Archaeological Trust identifies the site as being within Category C. No comment has been received from the Planning Ecologist, Countryside Council for Wales or from Dwr Cymru Welsh Water. One of the main considerations of this site would be in regard to the size of the development in relation to the settlement; an issue which arose during the Cwm Catti application. The site at 1.8 hectares has been reduced from that previously considered by TOG. The new site area would have an indicative number of 27 dwellings, which presents a relatively low density in current housing developments. By reducing the numbers within the site and utilising the phasing policy which is provided within the LDP, the 27 dwellings could be phased in over a number of years, lessening any impact on the village it terms of visual appearance and to the Welsh Language, which is widely spoken within the village. The benefits of this development would also assist in providing new dwellings within the village for local needs and furthermore the development on this scale would support the social fabric of the sustainable community and to the services that the community provides. The site has been through the SA process, a summary of which is further down this pro forma. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent

375 Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 195 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 3 13 Medium 1 0 High 3 22 See scorecard for issue breakdown Opportunities: See scorecard for breakdown Further SA scores relatively high with a far greater number of opportunities than potential issues

376 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: CL31/b Site Ref (where applicable): SC33/h4 Location: Adjacent to Derwen Deg, Porthyrhyd Site Area (Ha): 0.4ha Eisting Use* Partly residential and Vacant land *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* Residential 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Yes CL31/b Relevant Planning History The site has a number of relevant full planning or reserved matters permissions for single plots within the site. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

377 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The site in question which is a UDP allocation has had a number of planning permissions for development, with most being constructed on a plot by plot basis. In respect of the LDP, this site provides a clear commitment to developing houses. Since part of the site has not been constructed the JHLAS figure provides an indicative figure of 9 dwellings during the LDP period. The site has been through the SA process, a summary of which is further down this pro forma.

378 Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 170 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 4 14 Medium 0 4 High 4 18 See scorecard for issue breakdown

379 Opportunities: See scorecard for breakdown Further SA scores relatively high with a far greater number of opportunities than potential issues.

380 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC34/h1 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Land adjacent to Erwlas and Erwlon, Carmel Site Area (Ha): 0.54ha Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Residential allocation (CL30/b) Relevant Planning History The site currently has no planning permission. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

381 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality No Yes?

382 Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown The Cernydd Carmel SAC and SSSI are located to the south of the site. The site s proimity to this designation has been noted by the Environment Agency Wales and by the CCC Planning Ecologist. However, the site s proimity has not been raised as an issue by the CCW and although the site is in close proimity to the Cernydd Carmel designation the Carmarthenshire Settlements Biodiversity Assessment has identified the site and the two fields located between the site and Cernydd Carmel as being of low biodiversity value. It is therefore considered that development on the site can be achieved without impacting upon the designation. Further investigation may be required in support of any application in order to ascertain whether any mitigation measures will need to be employed in order to ensure that development would not affect the designated site. Carmarthenshire County Council Highways Division has noted that access to the site from Heol y Capel would require improvements due to the carriageway width and lack of footways. Access to the site would be further eplored at the planning application stage and does not have a detrimental effect upon the allocation of this site for residential use. The Environment Agency Wales has recommended that discussions are carried out with Dŵr Cymru Welsh Water (DCWW) in order to ensure that there is adequate hydraulic and biological capacity at the Carmel Waste Water Treatment Works so that development does not impact upon the Water Framework Directive classification. There are ongoing discussions taking place with DCWW and the EA in order to ensure the deliverability of sites. The EA have also noted that the

383 site is in close proimity to a principal aquifer which must be afforded the highest level of protection from pollution during any construction works. Policy EP1 provides for the consideration of proposals where they relate to impact on water quality and in relation to matters of environmental capacity. Consequently, any proposals will be required to satisfy its provisions. 6. Additional The candidate site is an agricultural field which is located within the development limits. The northeastern boundary of the site adjoins the A476 and the site s north-west side adjoins Heol y Capel. The southern part of the site etends to the south-west of the properties of Erwlas and Erwlon and the site s south-east side adjoins the play area to the south. The site s edges are defined by eisting field boundaries. The site s topography slopes slightly generally from south to north, however, the sloping on the site would not cause development on the site to impact upon the visual amenity of the settlement nor on the general amenity and privacy of the adjacent properties. The site is located within the main built-up area of the settlement which is concentrated around the A476 junction and it is considered that development on the site would be well-related to the eisting urban residential form and would be well-defined by the hedgerow boundary and adjacent trees at the south and west sides of the site. The site measures 0.54 hectares and could accommodate 10 dwellings at 20 dwellings per hectare. However, this density may potentially be reduced in order to take into consideration the low density of the properties which immediately adjoin the site, and the site may be suited to accommodate some 6 dwellings. Development on the site is considered to be of a suitable scale which would be proportionate to the eisting size of the settlement. There is a village hall, playground, church and chapel within the settlement and there are public houses located in nearby Temple Bar and Stag and Pheasant. Furthermore, there is a well-serviced public bus stop within 250m of the site which links the site to larger settlements beyond Carmel. The settlement of Carmel offers limited scope for potential development sites due to its proimity to the Cernydd Carmel environmental designation. However, it is considered that development of this site is unlikely to impact upon the environmental quality of the designation and that suitable mitigation measures can be employed through policies SP14 and EQ4 if appropriate. The site contributes to the deliverability of the Plan s strategic objectives by providing sustainably located development which is integrated into the urban form and as such it is recommended that the site is retained as a residential allocation in the LDP. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

384 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 82 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 3 15 Medium 0 0 High 4 11 Significant issues arise in relation to Climatic Factors and Population as a result of availability of services and as a result of the site s IMD ranking. Although the settlement of Carmel does not provide a large number of facilities and services the nearby town of Cross Hands offers a range of facilities, public transport links and employment opportunities. Carmel is well-linked to Cross Hands by a frequent public transport bus route. Opportunities: Significant opportunities arise in relation to a number of sustainability themes. These primarily relate to the site s access to services and facilities. Further There are no issues which a have been raised which indicate that the site should not be developed for residential use. As noted above, the site contributes to the Plan s sustainability objectives due to its proimity to the town of Cross Hands.

385 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC34/h2 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Part of Heathfield Industrial Park, Cwmgwili Site Area (Ha): 0.38ha Eisting Use* Employment Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Allocated as an eisting employment area Relevant Planning History E/22800 Full planning permission granted on 23/06/2011 for a housing development of 15 residential units. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

386 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value In the UDP the site forms part of a larger site which was allocated as an eisting employment areathe Heathfield Industrial Park. The Carmarthenshire County Council Employment Land Study (August 2009) has recorded considerable vacancy at the Heathfield Industrial Park and it is therefore considered appropriate to allocate a part of the Industrial Park for residential use. The Employment Land Study notes that the Industrial Park is worthy of safeguarding as an employment site and therefore it is appropriate to retain the remainder of the industrial park as an employment site in the LDP. Taking into consideration the recorded vacancies on this employment

387 site and its proimity to a range of other employment sites in the nearby Ammanford and Cross Hands growth area it is considered that the remainder of the site provides sufficient employment land to meet the requirements of the settlement. The site s status as a previously used site which currently accommodates empty and underused buildings make it a potentially suitable candidate site for residential use under the national policy guidance as set out in paragraph of Planning Policy Wales (edition 4). Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown have been received from the Technical Officers Group relating to the whole of Heathfield Industrial Park and the candidate site falls within that area. The comments received are therefore partly applicable to this site and have been noted below.

388 The EA have noted that the settlement is served by the Cwmgwili Waste Water Treatment Works which discharges into the Afon Gwili. This stretch is currently failing to meet Water Framework Directive standards for phosphates and further investigatory works are being carried out by the EA to ascertain the potential sources of phosphates and possible opportunities to reduce the nutrient loading to the stretch. The EA has also recommended consultation with Dŵr Cymru Welsh Water (DCWW) in order to ensure sufficient hydraulic and biological capacity in the area. There are ongoing discussions taking place with DCWW and the EA in order to ascertain the hydraulic and biological capacity in the area and to ensure the deliverability of sites. The EA has also noted that the site s previous land use as an industrial park may have caused contamination of the soil which may impact upon the Caeau Lotwen SSSI and that a preliminary risk assessment may be required. However, as part of application E/22800 the EA and Dŵr Cymru did not object to the application but did advise on surface and foul water discharge and on site clearance works. Taking into account that the site is subject to a current planning permission, residential development on the site is considered to be appropriate and deliverable. The Heathfield Industrial Park s eastern boundary adjoins the Caeau Mynydd Mawr SAC and the Industrial Park s eastern and southern boundaries adjoin the Caeau Lotwen SSSI. The candidate site in question is located at the Industrial Park s western side and it is considered that allocating this part of the site for residential development would be unlikely to have an impact upon the habitats and species located in either of these designations. The Carmarthenshire Settlements Biodiversity Assessment indicates that the site and the immediately adjoining areas are of low biodiversity value. Furthermore, the Marsh Fritillary Connectivity Study indicates that the site is unlikely to be suitable habitat for the Marsh Fritillary Butterflies. As the site is previously developed land and does not immediately adjoin areas of high biodiversity value it is considered that residential development on the site is unlikely to impact upon the ecological value of the site or surrounding area. There is an eisting access point to the site directly from Thornhill Road. This is currently used as a secondary access to the industrial park and is considered to be potentially suitable to accommodate residential development on the site. As the site is subject to an etant planning permission for the development of 15 dwellings it is in the interests of certainty and clarity that the site is allocated for residential use in order to reflect the site s planning consent. 6. Additional The candidate site is located within the development limits and comprises part of the Heathfield Industrial Park which is allocated as an employment area in the CUDP. The site has previously been developed and comprises a level concrete and tarmac yard with three commercial warehouses centrally located on the site, and at the southern edge of the site there are portable cabins and smaller outbuildings. The site adjoins the eastern side of Thornhill Road between the residential properties of Heathfield and Dyffryn Hedd. The site s northern and western boundaries are defined by hedgerow and the site s southern boundary is defined by the fence of the adjoining property- Heathfield. The site s east side is defined in part by a hedgerow at the rear of the Industrial Park s boundary, however there is no boundary or topographical feature which defines a small section of the eastern boundary which etends further eastwards. A suitable boundary could be provided which would separate the residential allocation from the eisting employment site. The site is adjoined by residential properties to the north and to the south and beyond Thornhill Road to the west. It is therefore considered that residential development on the site would be well-

389 related to, and integrated with, the eisting residential urban form. In addition, due to the site s positioning between eisting properties, residential development on the site would not etend the eisting ribbon pattern of development further north along Thornhill Road. The site is partly screened from Thornhill Road by the hedgerow which defines the site s western boundary which would minimise the visual impact of residential development on the site. The site is in close proimity to a well-serviced bus stop which links the settlement with the nearby town of Cross Hands and the wider Growth Area which is well-serviced in terms of the range of facilities, transport links and employment opportunities available. The settlement itself offers limited provision in terms of facilities and necessary services however due to the site s close proimity and accessibility to the wider Growth Area which is centred around Cross Hands and Ammanford it is considered that the site contributes to the deliverability of the Plan s strategic objectives by providing sustainably located development. The site has a number of advantages in terms of being a residential allocation. The site represents an appropriate previously developed site, it is adjacent to the eisting residential built form and is closely located to and well-linked to the wider Growth Area. Taking into consideration that the site has permission for residential development and that the remainder of the Heathfield Industrial Park shall be retained and safeguarded as an employment site in the LDP it is considered appropriate to allocate this candidate site for residential use in the LDP. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 88 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 5 18 Medium 3 4 High 3 10 Significant issues arise in relation to Climatic Factors and Population as a result of availability of services and as a result of the site s IMD ranking. Although the settlement of Cwmgwili does not provide a large number of facilities and services the nearby town of Cross Hands and the wider Growth Area offers a range of facilities, public transport links and employment opportunities. Cwmgwili is well-linked to the wider Growth Area 3- which is centred around Cross Hands and Ammanford- by a frequent public transport bus route. Opportunities: Significant opportunities arise in relation to a number of sustainability themes. These primarily relate to the site s access to services and facilities, the area s IMD ranking and public transport opportunities. Further There are no sustainability issues which indicate that the site should not be developed for residential use. As noted above, the site contributes to the Plan s sustainability objectives due to its proimity to larger towns within Growth Area 3 and especially to Cross Hands.

390 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC34/h3 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Land at Lotwen Road, Cwmgwili Site Area (Ha): 0.73ha Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Part of residential allocation GR3/31 Relevant Planning History E/01500 Full planning permission granted on 25/05/99 for a residential development comprising of 15 detached houses together with roads and sewers. 14 dwellings have been built, 6 of these are located on part of site GR3/31 and the remainder immediately adjoined the east of the UDP allocated site. The western part of site GR3/31 measuring 0.73ha did not form part of the planning permission site and remains undeveloped. E/01746 Removal of condition no.3 in relation to planning permission E/01500 approved at land off Lotwen Road, Cwmgwili. Granted 30/09/99. E/02510 Removal of condition no 3A on application E/01746 approved 30/09/99. Granted 11/01/01. E/19850 Outline permission granted on 01/03/2011 for residential development, with an indicative number of 10 dwellings, on the western part of site GR3/31. The eastern part of site GR3/31 was developed prior to the LDP period and therefore shall not be reallocated. The western part of the site, as represented by planning permission E/19850, is considered as to its suitability for retaining as a residential allocation in the LDP. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy

391 This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits) 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies

392 General Planning Principles No Yes A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown The Caeau Mynydd Mawr SAC which provides habitat for the Marsh Fritillary butterfly is located approimately 550m to the north of the site. The potential impact upon this designation was

393 assessed as part of application E/ The report concluded that the development was unlikely to contribute to an alone or in combination effect on the features of the Mynydd Mawr SAC. The Felin Fach Meadows Cwmgwili SSSI is located to the south-west of the site and is separated from the candidate site area by a field. It is considered that development can be achieved on this site without impacting on the SSSI. The Carmarthenshire County Council Highways Division has noted that the eisting access road to the site leading from Llys y Cadno is currently too narrow to accommodate the proposed scale of development. Therefore the access would need to be widened as part of the development. Conditions have been incorporated into the planning consent to this effect. Access would be further eplored at a detailed planning application stage and does not have a detrimental effect upon the allocation of this site for residential purposes. The Environment Agency (EA) has noted that the site is possible BAP habitat. As noted above the development s impact has been assessed and concluded that the development is unlikely to have an effect on the Marsh Fritillary habitat. Additionally, the EA has recommended consultation with Dŵr Cymru Welsh Water (DCWW) in order to ensure sufficient hydraulic and biological capacity in the area. DCWW have been consulted and as such planning consent E/19850 stipulates conditions for mitigating the eisting hydraulic overloading of the public sewerage system. As the site is subject to planning consent it is considered that there are no insurmountable issues which would affect the site s deliverability. 6. Additional The candidate site is part of a larger site which was allocated for residential development in the Carmarthenshire Unitary Development Plan measuring approimately 1.10ha. The undeveloped section of the site measures 0.73ha and, as noted above, has been granted outline consent for residential development. This area measuring 0.73ha is referenced as site SC34/h3. The access point to the site is gravelled and slopes slightly in a south-westerly direction. The site itself is level and largely consists of grassland. The site s southern boundaries are defined by hedgerow and trees. The site s eastern boundary adjoins the rear of the properties at Coed y Cadno and is separated by a fence. The site s northern and western edges are defined by the rear boundaries of residential properties which adjoin Heol Lotwen and Thornhill Road. The site is bounded by eisting residential development on three sides. It is considered that development on the site would be a logical etension of the built form and would be well-related and integrated with the eisting residential urban form. The site is subject to a current outline planning permission for residential development. Therefore, it is considered to be in the interests of certainty and clarity that the site is allocated for residential development in the LDP. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 114 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities

394 Issues Low 8 2 Medium 3 7 High 4 14 Significant issues arise in relation to Climatic Factors and Population as a result of availability of services and as a result of the site s IMD ranking. Other issues noted are the site s proimity to the Felin Fach Meadows SSSI and the site s access to services. Although the settlement of Cwmgwili does not provide a large number of facilities and services the nearby town of Cross Hands and the wider Growth Area offers a range of facilities, public transport links and employment opportunities. Cwmgwili is well-linked to the wider Growth Area which is centred around Cross Hands and Ammanford by a frequent public transport bus route. Opportunities: Significant opportunities arise in relation to a number of sustainability themes. These primarily relate to the site s access to services and facilities, the area s IMD ranking and public transport opportunities. Further There are no sustainability issues which indicate that the site should not be developed for residential use. As noted above, the site contributes to the Plan s sustainability objectives due to its proimity to larger towns within Growth Area 3 and especially to Cross Hands.

395 1. Site Details Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma Ref: GR3/38 Site Ref (where applicable): SC34/h4 Location: Adjacent to Meadow s Edge, Foelgastell Site Area (Ha): 2.3ha Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Yes GR3/38 Relevant Planning History The housing allocation site has been split into 3 separate developments. The first site on the western side Maes y Gorlan has permission for 1 dwelling and one further plot space The middle site has outline planning permission (subject to S106 agreement) with indicative house numbers of 13 dwellings Planning Application W/ Site area is 0.77 hectares. The eastern part of the allocation has reserved matters permission for 40 dwellings and is currently being constructed. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed)

396 Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits) 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The UDP housing allocation H1 is split into three separate developments and all have planning permissions. The western site includes self build plots with 2 remaining during the plan period. The middle site includes an outline planning permission for residential development. The indicative

397 layout identifies 13 dwellings on the site. The site was not taken to the Technical Officer Group due to the site having been considered during the planning application stage. The eastern portion of the allocated site is being developed for 40 dwellings which are currently under construction. Given the eisting planning history on the site, it is to be put forward as a residential allocation in the LDP for 55 dwellings. The site was put through the SA process, details of which are highlighted below. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths

398 Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. No known constraints. Yes No Unknown 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 115 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 2 2 Medium 2 3 High 1 12 See scorecard for issue breakdown Opportunities: Close proimity to health facilities. Close proimity to A48 (T). Further A significant number of High opportunities come from this site.

399 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC34/h5 Site Ref (where applicable): Candidate Sites /004 & part of Location: Field north of Clos Rebecca incorporating Site Area (Ha): Eisting Use* Agricultural Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Outside development limits Relevant Planning History No. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

400 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and No Yes?

401 increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site comprises a large agricultural field abutting the development limits in the northern part of the settlement. Eisting residential development borders the whole of the southern boundary of the site. To the west the site is the bordered by the A476 and to the east lies a narrow single track road (which eventually leads to Cross Hands). Access to the site would preferably be from the A476, which is currently separated from the site by a high hedge. It is unlikely that access from the narrow road to the east would be a feasible option in highway terms. The settlement of Llannon needs residential land in order for it to grow proportionate to its size and importance over the LDP period. The settlement has naturally epanded to the north east and south west in the recent past. This site, to the north east of the eisting built residential form,

402 would form a logical etension to the settlement, enabling new residential epansion on land that appears to be free from environmental and highway constraints. The site would be within easy walking distance of the services and amenities of the settlement. The site has good highway links, being situated adjacent to the main A476 between Cross Hands and Llanelli. In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement. The Local Planning Authority consider that the designation of this site is appropriate to ensure that sufficient land has been allocated within the LDP for residential development purposes in accordance with Planning Policy Wales. In conclusion this available land can be put forward as a residential allocation within the LDP. The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below. Response to TOG comments: EA: There are currently no significant water body issues. Policy EP1 provides for the consideration of proposals where they relate to impact on water quality and in relation to matters of environmental capacity. Consequently any proposals will be required to satisfy its provisions. County Ecologist: The comments made by the County Ecologist in relation to potential marsh fritillary butterfly habitat are noted. Such assessments would need to be addressed as part of a planning application prior to any development taking place. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 115 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 3 3 Medium 0 1 High 4 15 Opportunities: Further No notable Issues. The site represents an appropriate commitment.

403 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC34/h6 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Land adjacent to Maesybryn, Maesybont Site Area (Ha): 0.7ha Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Allocated for Residential Development (CL30/a) Relevant Planning History The site does not have planning permission. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

404 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The settlement is largely characterised by linear development as the majority of the built-from in the village has evolved in a ribbon pattern adjoining the west side of the county road which serves the village (B4297). The candidate site is located at the north of the settlement and is located opposite and between eisting residential dwellings. The site offers an opportunity for development on a small scale which would represent a logical reflection of the built-up frontage located opposite the candidate site. Furthermore, a ribbon pattern of development on the site would be in keeping with the character of the eisting development and complement the development on the west side of the road. Q.6 Additional considerations: General No Yes?

405 Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown The Environment Agency Wales (EA) have noted that the area lies outside the public sewer system and that they would highlight concerns over the proliferation of small private disposal facilities. Any private facilities will require either a permit or eemption from the EA. These comments have been noted and raise an issue to be addressed at application stage. This is an issue which affects the settlement as a whole and as such there are no other preferred sites within the settlement which have the benefit of access to a public main sewer facility. Dŵr Cymru Welsh Water (DCWW) has raised no objections to date. The Carmarthenshire Settlements Biodiversity Assessment indicates that the candidate site is of low biodiversity value and as such development on the site is unlikely to impact upon species or habitat of high importance. Furthermore, no issues were raised by the Countryside Council for Wales. The candidate site is located within an area identified as a sandstone safeguarding area.

406 However, taking into consideration the small scale of the site and its location between and opposite eisting residential dwellings it is considered that residential development on this site would not impact upon the resource. 6. Additional The candidate site comprises the frontage of an agricultural field located at the northern part of the settlement between the residential properties of Maesybryn and Ael-y-Bryn. There is no eisting boundary or topographical feature which defines the site s edge to the north-east, however, the other edges are defined by eisting field boundaries. There are eisting residential properties to the north, south and west of the site and open countryside lies to the east of the site. The site is located within the main built-up area of the settlement and is within walking distance of the primary school to the south of the site, and therefore development on the site would be wellintegrated and related to the eisting residential urban form. Development of the site would be a logical etension of the urban form due to its position between eisting residential properties and it would reflect the built form which flanks the south-west side of the main road located opposite the candidate site. Furthermore, the candidate site has good access to the wider highway network and is within walking distance of a public bus stop which links it to larger settlements and more services and facilities, including employment opportunities, in the nearby Ammanford/Cross Hands growth area. The site contributes to the deliverability of the Plan s strategic objectives by providing sustainably located development which adjoins the eisting residential built form with good access to the wider highway network and within walking distance of a public bus-stop. The site offers an opportunity for residential development in the village on a scale which is proportionate and in-keeping with the eisting size of the village and the facilities and services which it offers. For the reasons outlined above, the site is considered a suitable candidate to be retained as a residential allocation in the LDP. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 100 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 3 3 Medium 0 0 High 3 13 Significant issues arise in relation to the settlement s IMD ranking and with regard to access to services and public transport facilities. Opportunities: There are a number of significant opportunities which arise in relation to the site. These fall under a number of sustainability themes- air quality, climatic factors, material assets, population, health and wellbeing, education and skills, economy and social fabric. However, each of these opportunities arise in relation to possibilities to improve access to services and public transport and with regard to opportunities to improve the settlement s IMD ranking.

407 Further The issues and opportunities which arise in relation to the site are largely reflective of issues and opportunities which would affect the settlement as a whole and it is considered that there are no issues which would justify removing this residential allocation in favour of another site within the settlement. As noted above, the site has good access to the wider highway network and is within walking distance of a public bus stop which links it to larger settlements and more services and facilities, including employment opportunities, in the nearby Ammanford/Cross Hands and Carmarthen growth areas and Llandeilo service centre.

408 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC34/h7 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Land adj Nant yr Allt, Milo Site Area (Ha): 0.5ha Eisting Use* Partly Residential Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Residential Allocation (CL30/c) Relevant Planning History E/16158 Full planning permission for one bungalow and detached garage 22/6/2007. Recorded as completed in the Housing Land Availability Study E/18298 Full planning permission for single domestic dormer bungalow and temporary accommodation 26/3/2008. Recorded as completed in the Housing Land Availability Study E/18490 Full planning permission for 1 dwelling house with detached double garage 3/4/2008. This site was under construction at the time of visiting the site. E/23610 Full planning permission for the construction of dwelling and garage 15/10/2010. E/24646 Full planning permission for the provision of new detached 4 bedroom dwelling and separate garage 8/6/ Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related?

409 Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits) 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value

410 The settlement is largely characterised by linear development as the majority of the built-from in the village has evolved in a ribbon pattern adjoining the county road which serves the village. The candidate site is located at the south of the settlement and adjoins the eisting residential urban form to the north-west and is located opposite further residential dwellings. Development on the site would round-off the settlement at its southern gateway. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown There are no known constraints which would affect the deliverability of the site. Two dwellings have already been completed on the site with a further one under construction and the remaining two plots have full planning consent for a further dwelling each. Taking into consideration that the site is partly developed and has permission for the remainder to be developed it is in the interests of certainty and clarity that the site remains allocated for residential development in order to

411 reflect the eisting development and planning commitments. The candidate site is located within an area identified as a Sandstone safeguarding area. However, taking into consideration the small scale of the site and its proimity to eisting residential dwellings to the north and to the west it is considered that residential development and on this site alone would not have a significant adverse impact upon the resource. 6. Additional The candidate site was allocated for residential development in the Carmarthenshire UDP. The site comprises a section of an agricultural field which flanks the main road which travels through Milo. The site is located at the south of the settlement and the site s southern etremity currently defines the settlement s development limits at this point. The site is adjoined by open countryside to the south and there are no eisting boundaries which define the site s southern boundaries, however, the site s south-east side reflects the etent of the eisting built form located opposite the site and represents a logical continuation of the built form. The site s north-eastern boundary is defined by the adjoining road and the site s north-western boundary adjoins the residential property of Nant yr Allt. The site is located in close proimity to the main built-up area of the settlement which is focused around the site of Nantygroes school and the junction to the north, and therefore development on the site would be well-integrated and related to the eisting residential urban form. Development of the site would be a logical etension of the development limits due to its proimity to the built-up area and it would reflect the built form which flanks the north-east side of the main road located opposite the candidate site. Taking into consideration that the site already has planning permission and for the reasons outlined above the site is considered to be a suitable candidate to retain as a residential allocation in the LDP. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 130 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 1 11 Medium 1 1 High 3 15 Significant issues arise in relation to the settlement s IMD ranking and with regard to access to services and public transport facilities. Opportunities: There are a number of significant opportunities which arise in relation to the site. These fall under a number of sustainability themes- air quality, climatic factors, material assets, population, health and wellbeing, education and skills, economy and social fabric. However, each of these opportunities arise in relation to possibilities to improve access to services and public transport and with regard to opportunities to improve the settlement s IMD ranking. Further The issues and opportunities which arise in relation to the site are largely reflective

412 of issues and opportunities which would affect the settlement and the wider area as a whole and it is considered that there are no issues which would justify removing this residential allocation. Furthermore, the candidate site has good access to the wider highway network and is within walking distance of a public bus stop which links it to larger settlements and more services and facilities, including employment opportunities, in the nearby Ammanford/Cross Hands growth area and the service centre of Llandeilo. The site contributes to the deliverability of the Plan s strategic objectives by providing sustainably located development which adjoins the eisting residential built form with good access to the wider highway network and within walking distance of a public bus-stop.

413 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC34/E1 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Pantyrodyn Industrial Estate, Llandybie Site Area (Ha): 1.5ha Eisting Use* Proposed Employment Potential Use* Employment *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Proposed employment allocation (CL30/E1) Relevant Planning History The site comprises the northern part of the UDP Employment Allocation CL30/E1. 16/01/2009 E/20142 Full Planning Permission for Caravan Servicing and Repairs. 05/07/2004 E/06168 Full Planning Permission for Road layout to factory units at Llandybie trading estate. 10/10/2002 AM/01171 Outline permission for 10 industrial units. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed)

414 Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits) The area encompassing the Cilyrychen Employment area was not considered suitable for development limits and was therefore not recognised as a settlement in the Preferred Strategy. However, the site is part of an established employment area which lies outside the development limits. Due to the site s proposed use and its location adjoining an eisting employment area it is not considered appropriate to eclude the site on the basis of its siting outside of a recognised settlement. 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The candidate site falls within a Mineral Buffer Zone for a site with an etant permission. Paragraph 40 of Minerals Planning Policy Wales provides that no new sensitive development

415 should take place within the mineral buffer zone. However, employment use is not considered to be a sensitive land-use and therefore allocating the site for employment use would not be contrary to planning policy. A section of the site is located within a sandstone mineral resource safeguarding area. However, taking into consideration the site s proimity to an eisting built up employment area it is considered that further development on the Cilyrychen and Pantyrodyn Industrial Estate would not further impact upon the resource and its availability to be worked. To the west of the site is the A483 road and beyond that is a Special Landscape Area. Taking into consideration the site s small scale and proimity to the eisting built-up area of Cilyrychen and Pantyrodyn it is considered that appropriate development can be delivered on the site without having an adverse impact upon the Special Landscape Area. The majority of the Cilyrychen and Pantyrodyn Industrial Estate, including the part comprising the candidate site, falls within the Gas Pipeline Buffer Zone. This matter shall be further eplored at application stage and does not have a detrimental effect upon the allocation of this site for employment purposes. Taking into consideration that the site has the benefit of an etant permission it is considered that there are no insurmountable issues which would affect the site s deliverability. As such, in the interests of certainty and clarity it would be appropriate to retain the site for proposed employment use. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes

416 Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths No Yes Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown There are no known issues which would affect the site s deliverability. 6. Additional The candidate site comprises a gravelled area of land which formed the northern part of employment allocation CL30/E1 in the UDP. The site is bounded by the A483 road to the north and to the west and by the railway line to the east. There is no boundary to define the southern edge of the site as it forms part of a larger site which etends southwards beyond the candidate site. The southern part of the larger site area which adjoins the candidate site is already developed for employment use. The site has an eisting access point directly from the A483 road. The Employment Land Study (August 2009) notes that the candidate site would be ideal to accommodate an epansion of the established industrial estate that is sited immediately to the south, with both parcels having ecellent access to the road. Taking into account that the site forms part of a larger site which is already used for employment use it is considered that development of the candidate site would be logical etension of the eisting development. Furthermore, there are no foreseeable deliverability issues and the site appears ready for development with ecellent accessibility to the adjoining highway network. It is therefore considered appropriate to retain the site for proposed employment use in the LDP. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 95 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 6 6 Medium 0 1 High 1 10 Significant issues arise under Climatic Factors.

417 Opportunities: Significant opportunities arise in relation to air quality, climatic factors, material assets, health and wellbeing, economy and social fabric. Further There are no sustainability issues which indicate that the site should not be developed for employment use. The site contributes to the Plan s sustainability objectives due to the small scale of the proposed site and its proimity to the highway network and the nearby Growth Area 3.

418 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC34/E2 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Cilyrychen Industrial Estate North, Llandybie Site Area (Ha): 1.7ha Eisting Use* Proposed Employment Potential Use* Employment *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Proposed employment allocation (CL30/E1) Relevant Planning History The site comprises two smaller parcels which form part of the UDP Employment Allocation CL30/E2. 26/4/2010 E/22646 Full planning to replace eisting chainlink fencing and timber post and rail fencing with new 2.4m high steel palisade security fencing and gates south and east boundaries. Approved. 13/8/2009 E/21220 Removal of Planning Conditions. Conditions 4 and 5 of E/13877 to be removed to comply with the requirements of WO Circular 35/95 (Resubmission of E/20705 Refused 2/4/2009). Approved. 2/4/2009 E/20705 Refusal of Variation of Planning Condition. Variation of conditions 4 and 5 of planning permission E/ Refused. 12/10/2006 E/13877 Full permission for 2 No Industrial Units ( SQ FT, SQ FT) at land at Morgan Marine Ltd, Llandybie. Approved. 21/3/2006 E/12186 Full planning for factory units phase 1 & 2 ( SQ FT, SQ FT, SQ FT). Approved. This planning consent relates to a parcel of land located between the two smaller sites which together form site SC34/E2. 14/7/ P6/17/19647/92 Outline consent for Manufacturing / Industrial development. Approved. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size

419 not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits) The area encompassing the Cilyrychen Employment area was not considered suitable for development limits and was therefore not recognised as a settlement in the Preferred Strategy. However, the site is part of an established employment area which lies outside the development limits. Due to the site s proposed use and its location adjoining an eisting employment area it is not considered appropriate to eclude the site on the basis of its siting outside of a recognised settlement. 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence

420 General Planning Principles No Yes Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The candidate site falls within a Mineral Buffer Zone for a site with an etant permission. Paragraph 40 of Minerals Planning Policy Wales provides that no new sensitive development should take place within the mineral buffer zone. However, employment use is not considered to be a sensitive land-use and therefore allocating the site for employment use would not be contrary to planning policy. The TAN 15 Development Advice Maps indicate that there is a C2 floodzone to the north of the site. However, the site does not fall within this flood area nor does it adjoin it and therefore it is considered that it should have no impact upon the site. Furthermore, the site is proposed for employment use as part of an eisting industrial estate and as such falls within the category of less vulnerable development as defined in TAN 15. The majority of the Cilyrychen and Pantyrodyn Industrial Estate, including the part comprising the candidate site, falls within the Gas Pipeline Buffer Zone. This matter shall be further eplored at application stage and does not have a detrimental effect upon the allocation of this site for employment purposes. Taking into consideration that the site has attracted planning permission for employment development in the past it is considered that there are no insurmountable issues which would affect the site s deliverability. As such, it would be appropriate to retain the site for proposed employment use. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) No Yes Partly Adjacent

421 Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown There are no known issues which would affect the site s deliverability. 6. Additional The candidate site comprises two parcels of land at the northern part of the UDP allocation CL30/E2 and it forms part of the Cilyrychen Industrial Estate. The site s northern boundary is defined by the industrial estate s edge which adjoins open countryside to the north and the site s eastern boundary is defined by the railway line. The site s other edges adjoin the remainder of the industrial estate. Access to the site is readily available from the A483 via the adjoining county road and through the industrial estate. The Employment Land Study (August 2009) notes that the Cilyrychen Industrial Estate is an established employment location. Site 43 (UDP allocation CL30/E2) is allocated as an employment site and has been partially developed to deliver a range of incubator units and five warehouse units. Although the majority of the incubator units are vacant, they are of modern construction and are considered likely to appeal to businesses as the market recovers from the current downturn. The remainder of the site is considered worthy of safeguarding to facilitate future epansion of the estate in this, one of the more sustainable and accessible locations of all sites amongst the Tier 3 and 4 settlements. Taking into account that the site forms part of a larger site which is already used for employment use it is considered that development of the candidate site would be logical etension of the eisting development. Furthermore, there are no foreseeable deliverability issues and the site appears ready for development with ecellent accessibility to the adjoining highway network. It is therefore considered appropriate to retain the site for proposed employment use in the LDP. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

422 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 73 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 8 6 Medium 0 5 High 1 6 Significant issues arise under Climatic Factors. Opportunities: Significant opportunities arise in relation to climatic factors, material assets and health and wellbeing. Further There are no sustainability issues which indicate that the site should not be developed for employment use. The site contributes to the Plan s sustainability objectives due to the small scale of the proposed site and its proimity to the highway network and the nearby Growth Area 3.

423 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC35/h1 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Adj. Pant yr Helyg Site Area (Ha): Eisting Use* Agricultural Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Residential Allocation CL32/a Relevant Planning History No. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

424 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General No Yes?

425 Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site comprises an area of grassland to the east of the residential built form of Rhosamman and adjacent to the main A4068. It has no notable constraints and has a number of advantages in terms of its retention as a residential allocation, being situated along a key transport route and close to the local amenities and services of the settlement (and neighbouring Brynamman). In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement. The site also forms a residential allocation within the Carmarthenshire UDP. However due to the

426 size of the allocation in relation to the settlement, it has been considered appropriate to reduce its size, with a consequential amendment to the development limits. In light of the above, it is considered appropriate that this available land can be put forward as a residential allocation within the LDP. The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below. TOG comments: The potential for capacity issues at the WWTW is noted however discussions/consultations remain on going with Dwr Cymru which together with appropriate phasing etc does not preclude deliverability during the plan period. There are currently no significant water body issues. Policy EP1 provides for the consideration of proposals where they relate to impact on water quality and in relation to matters of environmental capacity. Consequently any proposals will be required to satisfy its provisions. An ordinary watercourse runs along the southern boundary of the site and a culvert along its eastern boundary. The River Amman is also in close proimity. Following receipt of the TOG comments from the EA, the size of the allocation has been reduced and now is located further away from the aforementioned features. However, the potential need for a FCA, in accordance with EA requirements, will be addressed at the planning application stage, prior to any development taking place. The comments made by the County Ecologist are noted and should be addressed at the planning application stage. Update May 2013: Evidence received post Deposit reveals that this residential allocation lies within a mineral buffer zone of an opencast coal mine situated within the neighbouring authority of Neath Port Talbot. Consequently, in accordance with national planning policy, namely Minerals Planning Policy Wales (MPPW, 2000) and Minerals Technical Advice Note (MTAN) 2: Coal (2009), the removal of this site has been suggested as a focused change. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 51 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 11 2 Medium 3 3 High 8 14 Issues arise in relation to Climatic Factors and Health & Wellbeing as a result of access to services and under Population as a result of the site s IMD ranking. Opportunities:

427 Further The site has a positive score in terms of sustainability appraisal, yet several issues arise as pointed out above, however, this must be taken into contet. Rhosamman is located on the main A4068 linking the Upper Swansea Valley with the Upper Amman Valley and Carmarthenshire. It forms part of a sustainable community with neighbouring Cefnbrynbrain and Ystradowen and is also situated very close to the Tier 3 settlement of Brynamman. It must also be noted that part of Rhosamman (in fact a larger proportion of the built form) lies to the north of the A4068 and is situated within the Brecon Beacons National Park and so provides a close link with this neighbouring authority. Rhosamman therefore needs to contribute an appropriate share of land to enable moderate growth over the Plan period. This allocation forms an appropriate site to accommodate a small residential development to meet the required need.

428 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC35/h2 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Adj. y Goedlan Site Area (Ha): 0.47 Eisting Use* Open ground Potential Use* residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Residential Allocation T10/c Relevant Planning History No. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

429 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? No Yes?

430 Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site comprises an area of open grassland largely surrounded by eisting residential properties towards the southern end of the settlement. The site has a number of advantages in terms of retention as a residential allocation close to the local amenities and services of the settlement, integrated to the eisting residential built form and with good access and highway links. In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement. In light of the above, it is considered appropriate that this available land can be put forward as a residential allocation within the LDP. The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below.

431 TOG comments: In respect of the EA s TOG comments, there are currently no significant water body issues. Policy EP1 provides for the consideration of proposals where they relate to impact on water quality and in relation to matters of environmental capacity. Consequently any proposals will be required to satisfy its provisions. made by the County Ecologist are duly noted. Such matters will need to be addressed in relation to the relevant policies of the Plan prior to development taking place. The comments made by the County Highways Division relate to there being inadequate visibility from the site access. Access could potentially be via two possible routes off Y Goedlan or directly off the A4068. Access would be further eplored at the planning application stage and does not have a detrimental effect upon the allocation of this site for residential purposes. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 75 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 4 4 Medium 3 2 High 1 9 Opportunities: Further No notable Issues. The site represents an appropriate and sustainable site for residential allocation.

432 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: Site Ref (where applicable): CS1386; Location: Land off Pant Y Brwyn, Ystradowen Site Area (Ha): 0.21 Eisting Use* Vacant grassland Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? White land within development limits. Relevant Planning History No recent planning history. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

433 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Development not considered to be Infill or a natural rounding off Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: No Yes?

434 General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site comprises an area of rough grassland adjacent to a small residential estate and is situated at a central location within the settlement, just off the main A4068. The site has a number of advantages in terms of its suitability as a residential allocation close to the local amenities and services of the settlement, integrated to the eisting residential built form and with good access and highway links. In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement.

435 In light of the above, it is considered appropriate that this available land can be put forward as a residential allocation within the LDP. The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below. TOG comments: In respect of the EA s TOG comments, there are currently no significant water body issues. Policy EP1 provides for the consideration of proposals where they relate to impact on water quality and in relation to matters of environmental capacity. Consequently any proposals will be required to satisfy its provisions. Matters relating to potential biodiversity issues in relation to the site are duly noted and regard will need to be had to the provisions of Policy EQ4 and all relevant policies contained within the Plan. made by the County Ecologist are duly noted. Such matters will need to be addressed in relation to the relevant policies of the Plan prior to development taking place. The comments made by the County Highways Division relate to potential access being directly off the main A4068. However, in putting forward the site for allocation in the LDP it is the intention that access would be gained through from the eisting residential estate of Pant y Brwyn. Access would be further eplored at the application stage. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 61 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 7 3 Medium 1 2 High 6 12 Issues arise in relation to Climatic Factors and Health & Wellbeing as a result of access to services and under Population as a result of the site s IMD ranking. Opportunities: Further The site has a positive score in terms of sustainability appraisal, yet several issues arise as pointed out above, however, this must be taken into contet. Ystradowen serves as an important service centre for this eastern etremity of the County. It is located on the main A4068 linking the Upper Swansea Valley with Carmarthenshire. It forms the largest settlement in its sustainable cluster and therefore needs to contribute an appropriate share of land to enable moderate growth over the Plan period. This site forms an appropriate site to accommodate

436 a small residential development to meet the required need.

437 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC35/h4 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Land at New Road Site Area (Ha): 0.33 Eisting Use* Vacant Land Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Residential allocation T10/a Relevant Planning History E/00497 outline planning permission for residential development was granted in Nothing since, no current planning permission. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

438 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? No Yes?

439 Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site comprises an area of brownfield land in a central location within the settlement, just off the main A4068. It has a number of advantages in terms of retention as a residential allocation close to the local amenities and services of the settlement, integrated to the eisting residential built form and with good access and highway links. In planning terms the site offers an appropriate option in terms of location and lack of harm to the amenity and character of the settlement. In light of the above, it is considered appropriate that this available land can be put forward as a residential allocation within the LDP.

440 The site has been subject to the SA process, details of which are highlighted in Section 7, below. TOG comments: In respect of the EA s TOG comments, there are currently no significant water body issues. Policy EP1 provides for the consideration of proposals where they relate to impact on water quality and in relation to matters of environmental capacity. Consequently any proposals will be required to satisfy its provisions. made by the County Ecologist are duly noted. Such matters will need to be addressed in relation to the relevant policies of the Plan prior to development taking place. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 61 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 7 3 Medium 1 2 High 6 12 Issues arise in relation to Climatic Factors and Health & Wellbeing as a result of access to services and under Population as a result of the site s IMD ranking. Opportunities: Further The site has a positive score in terms of sustainability appraisal, yet several issues arise as pointed out above, however, this must be taken into contet. Ystradowen serves as an important service centre for this eastern etremity of the County. It is located on the main A4068 linking the Upper Swansea Valley with Carmarthenshire. It forms the largest settlement in its sustainable cluster and therefore needs to contribute an appropriate share of land to enable moderate growth over the Plan period. This site forms an appropriate site to accommodate a small residential development to meet the required need.

441 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: FCM/SC35/b Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Former CP School, Ystradowen Site Area (Ha): Eisting Use* Vacant Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Former use within development limits Relevant Planning History May 2013: Outline planning application (E/27932) is currently being considered to replace the eisting disused Ystradowen CP School with appro. 9 No. 3 bedroom dwelling houses on the site. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

442 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and No Yes?

443 increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional Whilst it is noted that this site is a recent addition to the LDP s housing provision and did not form an allocation at the Deposit Stage, its inclusion as a focused change ensures that the Plan makes appropriate provision to meet the identified housing land requirement and that the LDP responds to the deletion of non deliverable sites, and/or those which are considered contrary to provisions of national policy as set out within the Focused Changes. The site is the subject of a current outline planning application and so this interest in developing the site for housing is a clear indication as to its deliverability within the Plan period. It is a previously developed site, located centrally within the settlement, close to local amenities and services and free from any obvious constraints.

444 Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

445 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC36/H1 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Land adjacent 20 y Garreg Lwyd, Llanedi Site Area (Ha): 0.75 Eisting Use* Agricultural Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? no Relevant Planning History S/ application for 1 dwelling, refused UDP GDC 3 and H8 inclusive this was for a frontage plot (appeal dismissed) 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

446 The site visit pic demonstrates good access options. The condition of the site is akin to the urban form with hardcore / machinery etc present. 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 *Note the consideration of flooding in this pro forma is primarily based on evidence available at the time of deposit LDP publication. Detailed consideration of updated evidence with regards to flood risk issues on allocated sites eg updated TAN 15 Development Advice Maps (March 2013) is provided in the Council s Strategic Flood Consequence Assessment (SFCA). The SFCA also contains recommendations for post deposit/focused changes as a means to ensure accordance with national policy* Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value

447 There appear to be sporadic instances of invasive species on site which will need to be addressed as part of any future development scheme. The topography of the site is well suited towards accommodating development with natural boundaries to the site apparent. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown

448 6. Additional The site comprises of an area of flat land located adjacent to the Garreg Lwyd housing development. The proponent seeks the allocation of the site for residential development which would result in a consequential amendment to the development limits. The built form in this location is characterised by attractive and large detached dwellings that provide an enclosed feel fronting onto the green space opposite to the Tafarn y Deri. The key determinants with regards to this site are: The site benefits from close proimity to the central hub of the village and will provide natural surveillance over the playground area; There is a good spatial link to the centre of the village via the path that runs adjacent to the playground as well as via the access point at the front plot; The site s development would consolidate the Garreg Lwyd area (and the grassed open space) as the provider of spatial orientation and the community focal point at the centre of the village; The site is likely to yield a low density development scheme in keeping with the eisting built form within the settlement; The site is not more than a 1 minute walk from the bus stop opposite Tafarn y Deri; There are no obvious constraints to development and the site is not elevated or prominent on the landscape; The east of the site currently appears as being more akin to an urbanised setting than that of the open countryside given that there are areas of hard standing and various items of equipment placed in situ. Development would thus provide an opportunity to tidy up the site and improve the general public realm; There are natural boundaries flanking the north and south of the site, with the northern tree line boundary re enforced by a small stream/water course; A man made boundary/boundary fence is required in order to identify a suitable western boundary to the allocation. The candidate site proponent within their submission outlines a location which appears logical and would allow sufficient capacity within the site area to make the allocation deliverable whilst also ensuring that there is no inappropriate encroachment into the open countryside. Although there is no western boundary at present, the proponent proposes to place a man made feature. Such a move could lead to biodiversity benefits as well as assisting in merging the development into the landscape by providing a defensible boundary; There appears to be adequate highway access. Given that the site was considered to be a reasonable allocation option, it was circulated for TOG/SA review. In terms of TOG feedback: Highways Eisting use considerations. Opposite and adjacent junction spacing requirements may apply on B4297. Optional route off Garreg Lwyd estate road currently accesses a children s playground. Required visibility splay will cross 3 rd party land to south side of estate road County Ecologist Hedgerows, Stream Corridor EA Ordinary watercourse running along the northern boundary of the site. No culverting and SUDS. Former land fill opposite Royal Oak Pub- Information states that if took in domestic waste- Would require a preliminary risk assessment prior to development The above matters are not considered to be issues that would render the site unsuitable for allocation and they can be addressed when any application/project level proposals are submitted for consideration. With regards to former landfill uses within/adjacent to the site this issue should be eplored further at project/application level and resolved/mitigated as and where appropriate. The necessary surveys etc would need to undertaken in support of a planning application and any mitigation/contaminated land strategy would require the approval of the relevant authorities. It is therefore considered that the site should be allocated for residential development in the LDP with a consequential amendment to the development limits. The site s conformity with the eisting built form, together with its sustainable location, are the key determinants in this regard.

449 Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: Score Summary Count 101 Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 6 17 Medium 1 7 High 0 6 The issues raised can all be addressed via the opportunities presented. This includes the promotion of public transport links and it should be noted that the site will be positioned within a 1 minute walk to the bus stop within the village. It should also be noted that the site is located within a reasonable proimity to the A48/M4. Opportunities: The site has potential opportunities in terms of air quality, economy and social fabric. It should be noted that the site is located adjacent to a play ground whilst the area s performance in terms of issues such as community safety is high. Further A score of 101 within a SC is considered to be very good and further underpins the soundness of the allocation.

450 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC37/H1 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Clos Y Parc Site Area (Ha): 2.5 Eisting Use* Under construction/vacant Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? yes Relevant Planning History Site has current permissions (Heol Hen side) and frontage has been cleared at Parc Elin Mair - S/18656 and S/22045 plots have come forward in this southern area. Some recent refusals noted on grounds of design/density. S/25584 (update Oct 2011) outline application for residential development on the eastern parcel of the site, approved on 26/02/ Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

451 The site visit pic confirms that the development of the site in depth has commenced with deliverability/market appeal demonstrated. 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 *Note the consideration of flooding in this pro forma is primarily based on evidence available at the time of deposit LDP publication. Detailed consideration of updated evidence with regards to flood risk issues on allocated sites eg updated TAN 15 Development Advice Maps (March 2013) is provided in the Council s Strategic Flood Consequence Assessment (SFCA). The SFCA also contains recommendations for post deposit/focused changes as a means to ensure accordance with national policy* Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value

452 Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown

453 6. Additional The site is an UDP allocation located within close proimity to the school, village hall and recreational area. The development contet is residential with some low density units already delivered on site. The overall development character on site is of low density large residential units which are visible upon the northern approach into Five Roads from Cynheidre. The site is the largest allocation within the village and it will play a key role in meeting the identified growth requirement for the settlement/sc across the plan period. The nature of the development density delivered on this site to date suitably contrasts to bungalow/higher density offers delivered elsewhere in the village and thus the contet is set to facilitate a wide ranging offer and mi of housing types/sites within the settlement/sc across the plan period. Parts of the site are under construction. The site has many benefits, thus: - Evidence of deliverability, with the site under construction and planning permissions attained; note a fresh application was submitted in October 2011 onto the frontage of the B4309 Llanelli Cynheidre road; - It provides a link between the centre of the village and the playground located in the northern etremity of the settlement; - It is within close proimity to the school and village hall; - There are no major biodiversity concerns; - The HLAS confirms that 1 unit has been delivered thus far within the plan period and this indicates that the site is deliverable. There have been some planning applications refused however it is not considered that these refusals are plan level issues and are application/dc matters; - The site is accessible and well integrated into the urban form. Given that the site was considered to be a reasonable allocation option and an eisting UDP allocation it was circulated for TOG/SA review. In terms of notable TOG feedback: Highways no issues, County Ecologist Hedgerows, EA/CCW no issues. It is considered that this feedback raises no concerns with regards to the soundness of re allocating the site area that was allocated within the UDP in moving forward towards the LDP. It is concluded that the site is appropriate for re allocation within the LDP. The site has confirmed its deliverability potential/market appeal already, whilst it is also located within a sustainable location net to the community s facilities. It is envisaged that the site will play a key role in meeting the identified growth requirement for the SC across the plan period. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 103 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Low 3 6 Medium 3 3 High 0 10 Issues The issues can be addressed via the opportunities presented reference should be made to the SA score card in this regard. Due consideration should be given to the fact that the site is located within reasonable proimity to the B4309 road in terms of evidencing the site s sustainable/public transport provision potential. Opportunities: There are a range of opportunities to further enhance the SA performance of the site, including education/skills and social fabric. In this regard, it should be noted Further that the site is within close proimity to the village school, hall and park. A score of 103 within a SC is good and underpins the soundness of re allocating the site for residential development.

454 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC37/H2 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Llygad y Fynnon Site Area (Ha): built Eisting Use* Under construction Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? yes Relevant Planning History S/16244 (2007) phase 2 12 no dwellings approved S/24141 (submitted 2010) phase 3-2no dwellings 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

455 The site visit pic demonstrates that the site is substantively completed. 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 *Note the consideration of flooding in this pro forma is primarily based on evidence available at the time of deposit LDP publication. Detailed consideration of updated evidence with regards to flood risk issues on allocated sites eg updated TAN 15 Development Advice Maps (March 2013) is provided in the Council s Strategic Flood Consequence Assessment (SFCA). The SFCA also contains recommendations for post deposit/focused changes as a means to ensure accordance with national policy* Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value

456 Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown

457 6. Additional The site is an UDP allocation which is now substantively completed. It is characterised by bungalow and semi detached dwellings and provides an opportunity to deliver a mi of housing types given the larger/low density residential units being delivered on other sites within the settlement / SC. The site s ongoing development has demonstrated the deliverability and market appeal potential of the settlement and it should also be noted from a sustainability point of view that it is located adjacent to the Mynydd Mawr cycle path which links the Gwendraeth Valley to Llanelli as well as on the B4309 public transport corridor. The balance is thus struck between market appeal and sustainability and this is a positive sign in terms of allocation potential. The only matter to determine with the site is whether it can make a contribution towards the identified growth requirement for the settlement across the LDP plan period and whether it can be allocated for residential development. The HLAS confirms that 11 units have been completed on site to date, 4 of which were built pre plan period. Taking into account the remainder of the consents and potential capacity of the site, it is considered that an allocation figure of 14 units is appropriate for the plan period. The site was not sent to TOG as it is largely completed. It is logical that the site be re allocated so as to reflect its contribution towards meeting the identified growth requirement for the settlement. The site was made privy to SA review in the interests of completeness. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: Score Summary Count 104 Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 3 7 Medium 3 3 High 0 10 The issues can be addressed via the opportunities presented reference should be made to the SA score card in this regard. Opportunities: There are a range of opportunities to further enhance the site s SA performance, particularly in terms of climatic factors, material assets, social fabric and education/skills. Due consideration is provided to the site s proimity to the cycle network and also to the fact that it is located on the main B4309 road in terms of evidencing the site s sustainable/public transport provision potential. Further A score of 104 within a SC is good and underpins the soundness of re allocating the site for residential development.

458 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC37/H3 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Land adj. Little Croft Site Area (Ha): 1.23 Eisting Use* Agriculture Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Relevant Planning History 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits) The site visit pic demonstrates the prominent frontage onto the B4309 and its potential synergy with the eisting residential built form.

459 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 *Note the consideration of flooding in this pro forma is primarily based on evidence available at the time of deposit LDP publication. Detailed consideration of updated evidence with regards to flood risk issues on allocated sites eg updated TAN 15 Development Advice Maps (March 2013) is provided in the Council s Strategic Flood Consequence Assessment (SFCA). The SFCA also contains recommendations for post deposit/focused changes as a means to ensure accordance with national policy* Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value

460 Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown

461 6. Additional Candidate site (CS0146) is located in the north east of the village and presents as being divided into 2 distinct sections. Section 1 abuts the main B4309 road and adjoins the eisting settlement limits along its southern flank (including the new Llygad y Fynnon development LDP allocation SC37/ H2). Section 2 is situated to the rear of the group of dwellings that front Heol Horeb. Section 1 presents as a flat pasture field and is situated on the northern approach to Five Roads. In terms of the advantages of this section: It adjoins the development limits and is well integrated within the eisting built form; It has clear potential access points; The B4309 has good public transport links which aid sustainability credentials; The site is proimate to the centre of village, including the school and post office; The site is flat, well enclosed by a tree/hedge line at its eastern boundary and is suitably integrated; The village park is opposite the site and a nearby footpath provides a spatial link to the school and village hall; The site is within close proimity to the Cynheidre to Llanelli Cycle path (former Mynydd Mawr Railway line) which further adds to the sustainability potential of the allocation. Section 1 slopes away gradually from the main road, with its eastern, northern and southern boundaries all well defined by natural and/or man made boundaries. Development of the site in depth would be in keeping with the eisting patterning for development in the northern area of the settlement and would accord with the other eamples of development in depth eg adjacent to Parc Elin Mawr and at Llygad y Ffynnon. The site s development will provide the opportunity to consolidate an intimate enclosure along the northern approach to Five Roads and would allow for the protection of the more elevated and eposed sites on the southern side of the village from inappropriate development. The consolidation of a suitable development scheme along this northern section could also assist in traffic calming along the northern approach which is currently a long straight stretch of road into the village and a 30mph zone. A potential issue with the site is that its northern boundary is traversed by an electricity pylon however it is considered that this can be taken into account at project/application level and suitably addressed. The pylon does not dominate the site and its deliverability is not called into question as a result. Section 2 is situated to the rear of dwellings along Horeb Road. It was not deemed appropriate to consider Section 2 i.e. land to the rear and adjoining Horeb Road for allocation because it would represent an unnecessary encroachment into the countryside and a departure from the predominantly linear/frontage patterning of development at Horeb Road (and thus could cause amenity/back land development concerns for residents in this area). There also appear to be deliverability concerns in terms of biodiversity on Section 2. Accordingly, it was considered that only Section 1 be taken forward for detailed consideration in terms of SA/TOG, with a small element of section 2 adjacent to Llygaid y Fynnon also taken forward so that it its potential in terms of providing an alternative access point into section 2 be appraised. The candidate site (subject to its refinement/reduction to focus on section 1 only) was considered to be a reasonable allocation option and was circulated for TOG/SA review. In terms of TOG feedback: Highways and EA no observations. County Ecologist Hedgerows, Mature trees? Bats? Stream Corridor, Grassland potentially of interest SV req to determine quality, Semi Improved Grassland on CCW Phase 1 survey. Scrub. CCW Eclusion of the southern part of this site is recommended as it supports marshy grassland. There are also records of marsh fritillary nearby. CCW suggests that the new boundary should follow the hedgerow. If this is not possible and the site is to be developed, mitigation would be required.

462 It is considered that the above issues do not compromise the site s allocation at plan level and that suitable mitigation can be developed at application/project design stage where necessary. The issues appear to be biodiversity related in terms of the need to ensure that suitable mitigation is in place and that key habitat features eg hedgerows are suitably integrated into the development scheme/planning application. It should be noted that the LPA has already taken account of issues in the southern section by removing a large part of the candidate site submitted area from the proposed allocation area (i.e. the removal of section 2). This means that there will only be a small area of section 2 within the allocated area adjacent to Llygaid y Ffynnon. This portion is included within the allocation to assist with highway access opportunities and to underpin the site s deliverability potential, however should there be issues with this area at project level then suitable mitigation (eg retention of the hedgerow) and alternative access provision could be readily identified. Due consideration may be given to informing linkages with any LDP phasing plan should one be developed (particularly given that other sites within the settlement/sc are under construction or consented) and due to this site s green field status. It is concluded that the candidate site submission (as refined/reduced in size) is suitable for residential allocation within the LDP. The site s sustainable location, together with its conformity to the eisting built form, are considered to be the key determinants in this regard. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: Score Summary Count 103 Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 3 6 Medium 3 3 High 0 10 The issues can be addressed via the opportunities presented reference should be made to the SA score card in this regard. Opportunities: There are a range of opportunities to further enhance the site s SA performance, particularly in terms of climatic factors, material assets, social fabric and education/skills. Due consideration is provided to the site s proimity to the cycle network and also to the fact that it is located on the main B4309 road in terms of evidencing the site s sustainable/public transport provision potential. Further The score of 103 within an SC is good and further underpins the soundness of allocating the site for residential development.

463 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: CL25/a Site Ref (where applicable): SC39/h1 Location: Land adjacent to Maes y Berllan Site Area (Ha): 0.48 ha Eisting Use* Vacant Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Yes Relevant Planning History The site has no relevant planning history 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

464 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value The site forms as a flat parcel of land set to the south of St Cyndeyrn Church, and which is currently allocated for housing within cluster CL25/a of the UDP. The site could support a mi of house types and is centrally located within the village settlement. In respect to the candidate site methodology, this site performs well against the criteria and it is considered that a sensitively designed frontage plots would not have any adverse impact on the surrounding character. In conclusion, there are no known environmental or infrastructure constraints with the site, although Dyfed Archaeological Trust identify the site falling within a category C. It is considered that the development of the site would comprise frontage plots with enough space for approimately 12 dwellings.

465 The site was put through the SA process, details of which are highlighted below. Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. No known constraints. Yes No Unknown Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

466 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 77 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 8 0 Medium 2 1 High 3 12 Please see scorecard for breakdown of issues Opportunities: Please see scorecard for breakdown of opportunities Further

467 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC40/H1 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Carway Farm Site Area (Ha): 0.6net Eisting Use* Agriculture / Under Con Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Yes cl/26 A Relevant Planning History Two dwellings have been completed on the road frontage. Planning permission references: W/14763 (DEC 2006) and W/18844 (Dec 2008). 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

468 The site visit pic demonstrates the access and the housing on the frontage. The pics also confirm a linear contet at this location and therefore the site should go forward as a frontage only allocation rather than to the depth proposed within the UDP. 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 *Note the consideration of flooding in this pro forma is primarily based on evidence available at the time of deposit LDP publication. Detailed consideration of updated evidence with regards to flood risk issues on allocated sites eg updated TAN 15 Development Advice Maps (March 2013) is provided in the Council s Strategic Flood Consequence Assessment (SFCA). The SFCA also contains recommendations for post deposit/focused changes as a means to ensure accordance with national policy* Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value

469 Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown

470 6. Additional The site is allocated for residential development within the UDP (20 units) and is located at the centre of the village of Carway. The road frontage is defined by a hedgerow along with 2 dwellings already built. The overall built form contet at this location is of detached residential dwellings fronting the B4317 being developed on a plot by plot basis rather than of large sites being developed in depth. In terms of the issues to consider with regards this site, it should be noted that: The site is centrally located within a short walking distance to the centre of the village. It is therefore situated in a highly sustainable location, adjacent to the hall, park and school; The site benefits from a prominent road frontage and good access; There are no obvious constraints to delivery; 2 frontage dwellings have been built out (HLAS confirms within the plan period). The remainder of the site has no planning permission; The built form contet on the northern side of the B4317 road is mainly linear/frontage development, and therefore it is deemed more appropriate to reduce the UDP allocation to a frontage allocation only going forward into the LDP; The amendment/reduction of the allocation to be of frontage only represents an opportunity to promote a logical infill development between the village hall and the new dwelling built to the north east; The provision of a frontage/plot by plot allocation at this location will suitably contrast with the volume house building offer being delivered at Ffos Las. This all assists in facilitating the delivery of a range and mi of development opportunities within the settlement/sc across the plan period; There is plentiful housing provision within the settlement (and the wider SC) already and thus an allocation of the magnitude proposed within the UDP is considered inappropriate. The site was sent to the TOG and the site frontage was SA d. There was no substantive feedback of any concern received from the TOG apart from the identification of an ordinary water course. All feedback is placed on file. It is considered that the frontage of the site should be allocated for residential development so as to consolidate the eisting linear built form contet and facilitate the brining forward of a logical infill in the centre of the village. This will result in a reduction of the allocated area from 20 to circa 8 units. The new north western limits should be drawn in line with the eisting limit to the rear of properties on the north side of the B4317. Carway Farm will thus be left outside the new limits. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 2 Score Summary Count Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Low 6 3 Medium 2 5 High 3 11 Issues There are a range of issues, some of which are socio-economic issues which development can seek to contribute towards addressing. Opportunities: The opportunities reflect the high spatial sustainability of the site in terms of its proimity to well being and educational establishments. Further The site scores poorly in SA terms, however there are a range of opportunities to improve its performance. In planning terms the site s allocation is sound and it is within close proimity to the village hall, park and primary school.

471 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC40/H2 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Brynseilo Site Area (Ha): 0.3net Eisting Use* Under con/vacant Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Yes the whole area is allocated as UDP CL26/c Relevant Planning History W/11219 PP awarded for 4no. 3 bedroom dwellings NOV 2005 Update 2013 Pending - W/ PROPOSED 5 PERSON 3 BEDROOM DISABLED BUNGALOW 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

472 The site visit pic demonstrates a site that is well integrated into the residential built form with a suitable access in place. The village centre is within walking distance. 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 *Note the consideration of flooding in this pro forma is primarily based on evidence available at the time of deposit LDP publication. Detailed consideration of updated evidence with regards to flood risk issues on allocated sites eg updated TAN 15 Development Advice Maps (March 2013) is provided in the Council s Strategic Flood Consequence Assessment (SFCA). The SFCA also contains recommendations for post deposit/focused changes as a means to ensure accordance with national policy* Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value

473 Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown

474 6. Additional It is considered appropriate to review candidate site CS and UDP allocation 26/C in tandem herewith as they both involve the same parcel of land and thus their joint consideration on this pro forma will assist in the undertaking of a concise and well informed review. The site presents as an area of vacant land with some scrubland which is enclosed within the built form of Brynseilo. The CS area is included within the UDP allocated area and is situated on its eastern end. The UDP allocation was for 8 units. Brynseilo is of a similar character to the other housing sites on the southern side of the B4317 such as Maes y Wern and Brongwendraeth. This side of the road is characterised by development in depth whilst the other side is more frontage/linear development. The issues to consider with regards to the potential allocation of site area are: The site is centrally located and within a short walking distance to the centre of the village; The site has good access and there appears to be no constraints to its development; The site s development would be in keeping with the eisting built form; The west of the UDP allocation site area attained planning permission for 4 units. 2 units have already been built out (pre plan period); The CS area is to the eastern end of the UDP allocation on an area that does not appear to have permissions in place at present. Given that the site was deemed to be a reasonable development option and eisting UDP allocation, it was sent for TOG/SA review. Highways stated that Maimum of 3No properties permitted off a shared drive, then adoptable standard access required. The EA stated that they would not support culverting, whilst the County Ecologist requested standard mitigation measures at project level. It is considered appropriate to allocate the site for residential development within the LDP. According to the HLAS, 2 units were built in 2008 and 3 remain to be built (thus leaving a figure of 5 to be claimed as an allocation within the LDP Plan period). The HLAS confirms that 2 completions have taken place on site to date within the p period. The allocation of this site is important because it is centrally located site and will provide a suitable mi of homes for the settlement, particularly in light of the volume house building offer likely to be delivered at Ffos Las. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: Score Summary Count -20 Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Low 4 4 Medium 2 4 High 3 9 There are a range of issues, some of which are socio-economic issues which development can seek to contribute towards addressing. The issue of accessibility to public transport was also raised. Opportunities: The opportunities reflect the high spatial sustainability of the site in terms of its proimity to well being and educational establishments.

475 Further The site scores poorly in SA terms, however there are a range of opportunities to improve its performance. In planning terms the site s allocation is sound and it is within close proimity to the village hall, park and primary school.

476 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: SC40/H3 Site Ref (where applicable): Location: Ffos Las Site Area (Ha): Eisting Use* Race Course and ancillary uses / Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent Potential Use* Residential 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? PDB site 42 Relevant Planning History There are a host of applications/consents, the below is just a selection so that the reader gains an appreciation of the high deliverability potential within the plan period: S/11568 Mied use development comprising racecourse and harness race circuit; eventing & cross country area; grandstand, parade ring stables; equestrian centre and paddocks; training establishments & associated paddocks; car parks for staff and visitors; bar & restaurant/café; hotel and restaurant, public house; housing (up to 250 dwellings); and associated infrastructure and landscaping. Outline planning permission 27 April S/17613 Mied use development comprising racecourse and associated facilities; equestrian centre; training establishments; housing; hotel, bar & restaurant and associated infrastructure land landscaping. Reserved Matters approved 21 February W/18133 Proposed residential development of 243 dwellings, plus conservatories, garages, car parking, means of enclosure, public open space and associated engineering operations. Reserved Matters approved 2 June S/20256 Mied use development comprising: racecourse & harness race circuit; eventing & cross country area; grandstand, parade ring, stables; equestrian centre & paddocks; training establishments & associated paddocks; car parks for staff & visitors; bar & restaurant/cafes; hotel & restaurant; public house; housing; and associated infrastructure & landscaping - Reserved Matters application for the design of buildings associated with the racecourse development: hospitality 1, hospitality 2 and ground maintenance shed. Reserved matters approved 23 December W/21596 Erection of 95 Dwellings including associated Garages, Means of Enclosure Landscaping and all Associated Building and Engineering Works. Amendment to Previous Consent (Application Ref. W/18133) to the Southern Part of Development Site '003'. W.d W/22492 Erection of Apartment Building (Comprising 9 dwellings), provision of access, car parking, means of enclosure, cycle store, pump station, bin store and all associated building, landscaping and engineering works amendment to previous consent (W/18133). Full planning permission 01 April 2010 W/20882 residential development for up to 280 residential units Committee resolution in 22 July Update 2012 approval of W/20882 above (outline): 20/6/2012 New application also taken to Committee Jan Construction of 157 no. units (variation of W/18133, reference number W/27059, FULL PP given 21/3/2013. The site was identified as a PDB site within the UDP: Future uses for this former coal etraction facility will be eplored within the contet of the policies of the UDP including the re-use of brown field land

477 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits) The site visit pics give an overview of how the former opencast site has been transformed into a major sporting/tourism attraction. They also demonstrate that the first phases of the residential element of the scheme are under way with some of the units already occupied. 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance

478 KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 *Note the consideration of flooding in this pro forma is primarily based on evidence available at the time of deposit LDP publication. Detailed consideration of updated evidence with regards to flood risk issues on allocated sites eg updated TAN 15 Development Advice Maps (March 2013) is provided in the Council s Strategic Flood Consequence Assessment (SFCA). The SFCA also contains recommendations for post deposit/focused changes as a means to ensure accordance with national policy* Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes?

479 Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown The site has the benefit of a range of consents/committee resolutions and much investment has already been made in the development which is further evidence of deliverability potential. Regard should be given to master plans etc which give a strategic overview. 6. Additional This pro forma will undertake an integrated review of UDP PDB allocation PDB 42 and candidate site submission CS Ffos Las is a former etensive open cast operation located adjacent to Trimsaran. It is in the process of being restored and developed in accordance with the raft of planning permissions in place and has transformed the area whilst also gaining a national profile. It is situated outside (but adjacent to) the south western development limits of Carway. The delivery of the race course and its ancillary uses has substantively reclaimed a large area of brown field land and the development provides the opportunity to deliver on many of the strategic objectives of the LDP, particularly in terms of the beneficial re use of brown field land, promoting tourism/recreation as part of economic regeneration efforts and also bringing forward a range and mi of housing. The main issues moving forward are seeking to ensure that these opportunities are suitably managed and delivered in a sustainable manner. The housing element of the development is being delivered by a volume house builder on the north of the site and accords with the integrated master plan for the site. Deliverability appears assured, with a number of units appearing as being under construction and/or occupied when the site was visited in the Summer of The candidate site proponent (CS refers) seeks to develop the area further for mied use development and is seeking an LDP mied use allocation in this regard. Prospective future uses outlined by the proponent include: further housing development, tourist accommodation, commercial and retail development and leisure. It is considered however

480 that there is sufficient scope within the LDP policy framework to consider any detailed proposals for these uses in due course and therefore this pro forma (and any resulting allocation) will only seek to deal with the housing element of the scheme so that a suitable contribution can be made within the LDP housing allocation figures. The issues to consider with regards to identifying an appropriate housing allocation are: There is planning permission in place for up to 250 residential units of which reserved matters have been secured for 243 (a few amendments for design etc may lead to a small net increase in units but will still be under 250). A Committee resolution is also in place to approve for up to 280no. additional units (outline and subject to various conditions etc) These figures/decisions can clearly contribute towards the LDP housing figures; In terms of the LDP evidence base: The HLAS states that no completions have been achieved to date on the site. The UCS suggests an indicative figure of 480 units for the site taking into account the permissions attained and the site area etc. It is considered that this provides a suitable indicative figure for the LDP given that much detail remains to be confirmed regarding the 280 unit outline application which only has a Council resolution in place at this stage rather than a full planning permission; Thought will be required as to how the site s development and the residential allocation itself should be cartographically represented via the amendment of the development limits on the Carway settlement map from that which was shown on the UDP. In this regard the master plan can be utilised to annotate on the deposit plan proposals map. The LDP housing allocation will be located on the Carway side of the development area in accordance with the master plan and planning permissions in place. It is considered that the spine road into Ffos Las can be utilised as the rounding off/nodal point when plotting the allocation area. The remainder of the Ffos Las development should not be allocated for a specific use because as previously stated it will be for the Plan s policy framework to determine any future proposals in these areas if/when they are received. This site was circulated for consideration of the TOG and for SA. The feedback of note received from the TOG was as follows: Highways Consideration required to provide public transport infrastructure to serve large site. Ecologist consideration of Afon Morlais and any habitat issues EA Protected plant species present within area (LRC records). Will request 7m buffer to watercourse. Although migratory fish do not have access as far as the proposed site, we would epect the integrity of the watercourse to remain, with a natural margin along its bank. There are a few ordinary watercourses shown on the map; one runs across the site at the north west corner, one runs along the north eastern boundary and River Morlais runs along the southern boundary (within) the site. No culverting of the watercourse. SUDS should be implemented fully. With reference to the above comments it should be noted that the master plan clearly shows how the Afon Morlais etc is integrally built into the overall redevelopment scheme design. Mitigation for biodiversity and water course issues already appear to be integrally built into the overall site design. It is considered that with the necessary project level site design, surveys and mitigation the allocation is deliverable with any issues capable of being considered and mediated at planning application level (where there will be detailed liaison with the relevant consultees). Accordingly, it is considered that a housing allocation for Ffos Las at Plan level is sound. The scale of development proposed at Ffos Las is significant and in this regard the site has an important role to play in meeting the identified growth requirement across the plan period. The UCS outlines an indicative figure of 480 no. residential units and it is considered that this provides a suitable allocation figure moving forward towards deposit. The allocated housing area will focus upon the Carway side of the site s spine road. Any mied use development proposals for the remainder of the site should be carefully considered at planning application level in accordance with the LDP policy framework. Given the scale of the housing units proposed, due consideration will be required with regards the potential nurturing of linkages to any LDP phasing plan should one

481 be developed in the future, also the brown field status is noted in this regard. Update 2011/12 a planning application on the site for solar panels was approved this is further evidence of deliverability and the potential of this site to deliver on the wider strategic objectives of the LDP as well contribute towards the identified residential growth requirement. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: Score Summary Count 117 Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Low 6 3 Medium 2 4 High 2 13 Issues The issues raised accord with the options epressed by the CCC highways department in terms of the need to ensure public transport services the site. Whilst being an issue this is also an opportunity to further the site s sustainability performance. Opportunities: There are opportunities in terms of health and well being as well as education and Further skills (it is noted that the site is within close proimity to the school). A score of 117 within a SC is good. The site has the benefit of planning consents and an integrated development framework/master plan will guide its future development. Update 2011/12 note the approval for solar panels on site.

482 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: CL45a Site Ref (where applicable): ACS / SC41/h1 Location: Adj Valley View, Llanfynydd Site Area (Ha): 1.1 Eisting Use* Agricultural Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Allocated for residential use (CL45a) Relevant Planning History The site is allocated for 12 units in the UDP. Outline planning permission has been granted on the site for 14 units (ref. E/18174) in April Reserved Matters was refused on plot 4 (ref.e/21273) in August 2009 as a lack of information was submitted with the application on design and surface water. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

483 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? No Yes?

484 Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site is an eisting allocation in the UDP and has a valid outline planning permission. The site owner is actively trying to bringing the site forward by submitting reserved matters for one plot, which was refused in The site is well related to the settlement and provides sufficient residential land for the settlement. It is considered appropriate to retain this site as a residential allocation in the LDP, with the number of units on the site reflecting those on the approved outline permission of 14 units. 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 21 Score Summary Count Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues Distance from nearest rail station Distance from trunk road Distance from nearest secondary school & adult education facility

485 Opportunities: n/a Further See score card for further detail. 8. Technical Officer Group Dyfed Archaeological Trust Category D - The proposed allocation and development of this site may impact adversely on a heritage asset. However, this site can be allocated as historic environment interests can be protected through the attachment of appropriate conditions to planning consent. Highways Biodiversity Officer Environment Agency No observation. Outline permission has been granted (E/18174) for this land. Conditions as therin. Small part of site is close to flood risk zone. Hedgerows. Biodiversity & Fisheries: No known issue. Pollution Prevention: Settlement served by the small Llanfynydd WWTW. Dwr Cymru have indicated that the works are at biological capacity, however they are not within the AMP 5 quality programme. We would recommend consultation with DCWW to ensure hydraulic and biological capacity and possible phasing of development. If Dwr Cymru feel unable to accept this allocation or cannot remain compliant within their Environmental Permit we would object. Flood Risk: We do not have updated flood map information for the Afon Sannan watercourse that eists to the west of the site. The best information available suggests that the site would not be affected by etreme flows. We would require a topographical survey prior to any development. Groundwater & Contaminated Land: No known issues. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.

486 Carmarthenshire LDP Site Assessment Proforma 1. Site Details Ref: CL44b Site Ref (where applicable): ACS / SC42/h1 Location: Adj Maesygroes, Brechfa Site Area (Ha): 0.8 Eisting Use* Agricultural Potential Use* Residential *if candidate site as proposed by respondent 2. Land Use/ Planning History UDP allocation? Allocated Residential use (20 dwellings) (CL44b) Relevant Planning History None. 3. Phase 1 Identification of Strategic Sites Is the Site Strategic? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No (Site proceeds to Phase 2a as a Non-Strategic Site) The site is not considered to be strategic in nature for the following reasons: not located in a settlement defined as a Growth Area not of an appropriate size not situated at a key location in terms of transport and accessibility the site is not critical to the delivery of the strategy This does not preclude the site s consideration as a Non-Strategic Site. Epanded reasons for non identification of the site as strategic are available. 4. Phase 2a Initial Analysis Q.1 Land use allocation specific or non allocation related? Allocation (proceeds to Q.2) Non allocation (Considered through LDP policy) Q.2 Within or immediately adjoining an identified settlement in the Preferred Strategy? Yes (Site proceeds to Q.3) No (Site is dismissed) Q.3 If residential, can the site accommodate 5 or more houses (i.e. is >0.16ha in size)? Yes (Site proceeds to Phase 2b) No Considered under the review of Development Limits)

487 5. Phase 2b Further Analysis Q.4 Is the site located within or adjacent to any of the following? (If yes, site does not proceed ecept where potential for mitigation can be demonstrated) KEY DETERMINANTS No Yes Partly Adjacent Nature and Landscape Conservation Ramsar Site Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) National Nature Reserve (NNR) Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Common Land or Registered Village Green Cultural Heritage Scheduled Ancient Monument or remains of national importance Flooding TAN 15 Development Advice Maps EA Flood Map - nat_floodzone3 Minerals Mineral buffer zone Q.5 Would development of the site represent or result in: General Planning Principles No Yes Tandem development Ribbon development Coalescence Development unrelated to the eisting urban form Sporadic & fragmented pattern of development (either constitute or contribute to) An illogical etension to the settlement Development not considered to be Infill or a natural rounding off Conflicts with eisting land use or known plans and strategies A Detrimental Impact on the Character and Setting of the settlement or its features (including views and glimpses both into and out of the settlement) A loss of areas of open space and amenity value Q.6 Additional considerations: General Does the site have an available access point with adequate visibility? Would development at the site impact upon the highway network and increase the risk to highway safety? Is it Previously Developed Land? Soil / Agricultural Land Quality No Yes?

488 Does the site contain high carbon soil e.g. peat? Does the site contain high quality agricultural land? No Yes? Q.7 Is the site located within or related to any of the following?: Nature and Landscape Conservation Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) Cultural Heritage Conservation Area No Yes Partly Adjacent Q.8 Would development at the site impact upon species/habitats of high importance? (refer to Biodiversity/Connectivity Study) Yes No Unknown Q.9 Accessibility - Is the site within a settlement with access to, or within easy reach of, the following: No Yes Rail network Highway network (A or B roads) Public transport Cycle ways and/or footpaths Q.10 Site Deliverability - Are there any infrastructure or other issues on the site that would affect its deliverability during the Plan period. Yes No Unknown 6. Additional The site is a current allocation in the Carmarthenshire UDP for 20 units, it was also allocated in the Carmarthen District Local Plan for 16 units housing. No development has taken place on the site, nor has any application been submitted on the site. There are no known constraints to the development of the site and it is not clear why the site has not been developed. The site is a relatively flat and lies at a higher level than the road. It appears to be agricultural use at present and is bounded by hedgerows. Access to the site is considered to be acceptable. The site lies in a good position, central to the village s amenities. The site is an infill site which is appropriate for the settlement. It is considered that the site should remain to be allocated for residential use/ Following a re-appraisal of the site, a figure of 14 dwellings is considered to be more appropriate for the site.

489 7. Sustainability Appraisal Score: 72 Score Summary Count Issues Low Medium High Threats No. Prospective Opportunities Issues appear to be relating to the distance from the nearest train station and motorway. Opportunities: Lies on the route of a high frequency bus route Short distance to recycling site & nearest PROW Lies in close proimity to recreation facilities, primary school and local shop. Further The site scores well due to the site being located close to the centre of the village. 8. Technical Officer Group Dyfed Archaeological Trust No comment Highways Biodiversity Officer Environment Agency No observations. Footways required. Possibly requires improved public transport facilities (bus stop). Constraints: Small part of site minor aquifer. Ordinary watercourse along western boundary. Hedgerows. Biodiversity & Fisheries: A 7 metre buffer strip will be required along the adjoining watercourse. Pollution Prevention: The settlement is served by the small Brechfa WWTW. There are currently no significant water body issues. However, your Authority must ensure that this development will not cause deterioration of the water environment thus impacting on the Water Framework Directive classification. We would recommend consultation with DCWW to ensure capacity at the works. Flood Risk: No known flood risk issues. Groundwater & Contaminated Land: No known issues. Note: Reference should be made to the guidance notes accompanying this proforma when interpreting its contents.