Yesterday was the monthly meeting of Bridgend Council’s planning committee and top of the agenda was a planning application for a housing development on the site of the former St John’s school in Newton, Porthcawl (pdf).
The meeting was webcast as is available here.
There have been several big changes to the original plans (summarised here). It follows further consultation after the proposals were deemed to not be of high enough standard for national “placemaking” guidelines:
- The number of homes has been cut from 74 to 57, making the scheme less dense overall. The majority of homes (40) will be 4-bedroom homes.
- There will be what’s described as an “enhanced gateway” at the main entrance accessed via Birch Walk as well as improved landscaping.
- A signature “Rectory” building similar to the design of the original school buildings will be built at the entrance (pictured above).
- The proposed apartment block has been reduced in height.
- Materials (render etc.) have been changed to better fit in with the Newton Conservation Zone.
Despite the changes, some objections remained. These include concerns over the overall size of the development, the impact on the conservation zone and issues about drainage caused by the removal of trees, hedgerows and grass.
A representative of the developer Taylor Wimpey said there were no further objections to the scheme from statutory consultees.
Cllr. Ken Watts (Ind, Newton) welcomed the report and the changes – praising the work of planning officers – particularly improved materials and a reduction in the number of houses. Any remaining issues were minor including street lighting, health provision and restrictions on garage conversions.
Cllr. Amanda Williams (Ind, Coity) noticed the condition for funding towards play facilities, but there was no idea of where those facilities would be. Cllr. Watts clarified that there was a playground very nearby and that was likely to be refurbished.
Cllr. Roz Stirman (Ind, Llangeinor) sought clarification of affordable housing and was told there was enough funding sought through conditions for 4 social-rented houses and 5 “intermediate dwellings” (i.e. shared-ownership).
The application and conservation area consent were both approved unanimously, subject to Section 106 conditions.
