This application is for a very large extension to the east of the House which effectively turns Rock House into two semi-detached properties. It will be considered at the DMC on 29th January. The town council has objected to this development.
Variation of Condition 11 of Planning Permission NP/04/316 to allow change of use from Manager’s accommodation to holiday unit.
Variation of Condition 11 of Planning Permission NP/04/316 to allow change of use from Manager’s accommodation to holiday unit.
Registration Date: 17th July 2019. Cancelled. However, there has been a revelation of a serious error made following a previous application. View the planning files. (On the National Park website).
Newport Golf Club
In 2005 Newport Golf Club was granted permission to extend the accommodation of the golf club and and the golf course to an 18 hole course. It was argued that the extra accommodation which included 10 additional letting units, new manager’s accommodation, additional to the existing 4 flats (3 owned by the golf club) were needed to make the business viable. The planning permission tied the accommodation to the golf club with a 106 agreement, which meant it could not be sold off separately to the golf club.
The view from Newport Links Golf Club
In 2013 the Golf Club owners were granted permission to have the 106 agreement lifted from the 3 original flats by the DMC members, against officer advice, and providing that the proceeds was reinvested back in the business. Some 6 years later it came to the notice of a planning officer that the 10 units had been sold on the open market. Upon investigation it was revealed that the modifications to the 106 agreement to remove the restriction from the 3 flats had removed it from all the accommodation.
Thus all 10 units have been sold off, as well as nine holes of the golf course. Initially it appeared that there was no application to lift the 106 agreement on these units nor planning permission to allow for the sale of these 13 units on the open market.
You can see the monitoring officer’s report to the DMC meeting on the 5th February 2020 by clicking here. You can also view an article in the Western Telegraph, in respect of the sale of the 10 units. Further articles and letters to the monitoring officers from a local resident and the reply from the monitoring officer can be found below.
Western Telegraph Article published on 3rd February 2020
The article can be seen by clicking this link. In it the newspaper states that “NO ACTION is likely to be taken by the national park over an “apparent breach” of a section 106 agreement which resulted in “an unexpected windfall profit” to the owner of Newport Links golf club.
Monitoring Officer’s Report to the DMC.
The Monitoring Officer’s report to the 5th February meeting highlights a serious error made, which allows the owner of the Golf Course to disregard the wishes of the DMC when planning permission was originally granted. See Monitoring Officer report.
A local resident wrote in response to the Monitoring Officer’s report. You can view this letter by clicking below.
The last correspondence in this saga was between a resident and the monitoring officer. In a letter sent to the monitoring officer, these points were made: The Officer did not carry out the Member’s instruction, by making a mistake in discharging the original 106 agreement. The Authority has allowed development in the open countryside contrary to policy. The Authority has not supported the local economy by its action. Pointing out that the only option left was to refer the matter to the Audit Office. The monitoring officer thought it would be beneficial and looked forward to engaging with the it in due course. It would seem there is no recourse for the mistakes made by the Planning Authority even when the the mistakes have resulted in a major development in the open countryside, with no justification for its existence in this prime position overlooking Newport bay.
Built on the site of the OLD MIDDLE GARAGE, a development of 6 houses with 4 affordable rented units in the original house. All 6 open market houses were sold as second homes. Prices were originally advertised from £158,95, but came on the market and sold from just under £200,000 for a bedroom property. Currently, there is an application in to vary the condition relating to the car parking spaces on the opposite side of the road, in order to sell some of the car parking spaces allocated to the rented units. This application has now been approved. The parking spaces are on the market for £20,000 each.
This is a development where 100% of the 8 properties are affordable homes to rent. This was achieved because the Town Council owned the land. The problem is the design, which is totally out of keeping with anything else in Newport. It bares no resemblance to the properties that surround it. It is in stark contrast to the vernacular architecture of the town. Further to that it blocks out Carningli as one travels up Parrog Road. One of the most important and much loved landmarks marred by inappropriately designed properties for this very special location.
A controversial development of 35 dwellings on a site that was originally put in to the Local Development Plan for 12 with a maximum of 20 dwellings, due to the constraints of the surrounding narrow lanes and the visual impact of the site. 70% should have been affordable and 30% open market. After planning permission, only 40% are affordable to rent (occupying a very small section of the site). The owners of the site promised some affordable properties to buy by local employees. In fact this was the carrot that encouraged the Development Management Committee to grant permission, along with a well travelled petition signed by around 1000 people, few of whom had anything to do with Newport. The members were told the market properties would start at £100,000 and provide local workers with a step on the housing ladder. They are now coming on the market with starting prices from an eye watering £340,000 and £375,00 for the 2 bedroom properties and up to over £500,000 for 4 bedroom properties- way beyond the scope of local people, with the inevitability of more second homes, with not even a crumb for the young people living and working here. How can this be?
The impact of this development, due to the amount of houses all crammed together, and the height of the them, combined with the location next to the church and castle is nothing short of tragic. The annihilation of ancient hedge banks to create numerous access points has totally changed the character of this part of Newport. The impact of traffic on the narrow lanes surrounding has yet to be experienced. The social rented houses is separated by both fences and hedges from the market housing so that the only pedestrian route into town from them is along a narrow road with steep sides and no pavements. (See news page for ongoing battle to get a safe path installed from the rented houses through the open market site). Only one house is orientated North South and there’s not a solar panel in sight. The Town Council did not support this development. How could a National Park allow it?
Gateway to Newport approaching from Gilgwyn.
This picture shows that another chunk of the ancient Bentinck hedge bank has been removed. The house behind is one of a number of houses that are for sale on the site for a staggering £525,000.
Nearing completion one of the seven houses on the Church Fields housing development ranging in price from £485,000-£525,000 that tower down over Feidr Bentinck. The ancient hollow way now totally destroyed. The hedge cut down low the length of the lane to afford the properties a view of the open fields beyond. The splayed entrance to the site (see above) joins the natural hedge bank with a newly constructed turf bank, with no attempt to create any sense of continuity between the old and the new.
This recent development causes light pollution – something that the National Park Development Plan says should be controlled. The picture shows Y Garn in the background, which is affected by the light pollution from this development, as are the properties above. When the lights are on it is like a beacon, due to the size and style of the triangle window.
In this case, the Development Management Committee (DMC) controversially granted planning permission by 7 votes – 7 votes! The National Parks DMC Chairman sided with the case officer who had “mistakenly” misrepresented the results of a petition signed by 151 Newport residents overwhelmingly opposing this development, when she claimed in her written report to the DMC that the petition was actually supporting the development. She was picked up on this point, but it appeared that some of the DMC had already made up their minds. This One Planet Development bordering iconic Carningli S.S.I. landscape does not conform with the Sanford Principle- ( A concept in the management of protected landscapes in the UK) National Parks Policy Review Committee chaired by Lord Sanford which states “National Parks Authorities can do much to reconcile public enjoyment with the preservation of natural beauty by good planning and management. Priority must be given to the conservation of natural beauty.”
Several letters of objection to this application received, summary of objections can been seen in the Officer’s report on the planning website. The Town Council recommended approval of this application.
This is how the cottage looks now, we do not have a design for the new dwelling, but one can only imagine that this unique longhouse cottage will be lost forever.
Bettwys Newydd (This case dates back to 2008 and ran for many years.) This is a massive development on the Parrog, which was the subject of a huge protest. According to the National Park’s own Monitoring Officer, numerous mistakes were made by Planning Officers and £77,000 of public money was spent by the Pembrokeshire Coast National Park handling the application. The Welsh Government Planning Inspector heavily criticised the National Park for a visually inappropriate development, but he allowed the appeal and the building remains. Much earlier intervention by the public might have prevented this, hence this website-to draw attention to planning applications as early as possible. The full story is documented on the old Opposition Group Website.
