LANDOWNERS keen to fill the county-wide shortfall provision of approximately 900 dwellings have presented their proposals to the Welsh Planning inspectorL.

Earlier this month Monmouthshire County Council was told by planning inspector Sian Worden that the 4,000 sites identified in the Local Development Plan was an underestimate and informed the authority that it had to find sites for an additional 900 homes.

At the reopening of the examination of Monmouthshire's proposals in Magor last week the authority believed that the new target could be met through extensions to existing strategic allocations along with the inclusion of a few additional sites.

However landowners and their agents outlined various proposals for a number of alternative sites to be included as part of the shortfall in housing requirement.

The overall examination process, which started in June, has been extended with three additional sessions being added (Tuesday, October 1 to Thursday, October 3) to consider the overall provision and the additional housing sites to meet the shortfall in numbers, affordable housing issues and to make conclusions in closing the examination.

In the meantime Monmouthshire County Council's report into the proposed additional housing provision will be presented to members at a full meeting of the authority on June 27, with a view to seeking council endorsement.

The council will also be consulting on the additional housing sites, debated below, for a statutory six-week period starting at the end of June.

Monmouthshire planning officers will then collate any representations received and pass on the information to the Inspector at the end of the consultation period and will publish these findings on their website.

SENIOR CARE VILLAGE,

LLANFOIST

"WE think that Monmouthshire has ignored the needs of the elderly in the county," said Davina Powell from Nathaniel Lichfield, agents for the senior care village at Grove Farm in Llanfoist.

"There is evidence that Monmouthshire's residents are getting older and that the older person's strategy has been ignored in the Local Development Plan."

John Cottrell, the agent's planner and urban designer, said, "There is little choice under the plan for the provision of care for the elderly."

The inspector then questioned the authority over the lack of choice claims.

Martin Davies, Monmouthshire's development plans manager, said, "We had a criteria for elderly provision before, but it was felt this was very generic so, as a consequence, we do not have a care homes policy.

"If there was a need developers would come on board and build complexes like the McCarthy and Stone's proposal for Abergavenny which now has planning provision for 38 units in the centre of town. We also feel that the needs of the elderly are well catered for in other policies."

The Inspector asked, "Is this a light touch in regards to elderly provision?"

Mr Cottrell responded, "In reality this so called light touch approach to the elderly is likely to be largely ignored by developers."

Ms Powell added, "We feel that the LDP isn't fit for the existing elderly residents yet alone those who are getting older in the future."

The inspector then asked if it was more expensive to build elderly accommodation over housing available on the open market.

Ms Powell responded, "It is more expensive and in pure development terms less desirable when it comes to realising a financial return. Building homes for older people can be more expensive and ideally it requires a specialist sector developer to have a long-term commitment to the project.

"In this instance we have a landowner who is not looking for instant profit, but a long-term investment into a project."

The senior care village at Grove Farm proposes to have a 100-bed dementia care home, 200 assorted dwellings and two respite cottages. The manor house, a listed building, would be converted into a medical centre while the current range of ancillary buildings would be suitable for conversion into small business units aimed at the elderly.

"Grove Farm is currently a 40 acre site, but only 15 acres of it will be used for the care village," Ms Powell pointed out.

"The landowner has set aside particular areas of landscape importance that are not to be developed.

"This project benefits from the formation of a steering group to evaluate the proposal, which has gained a good level of support."

The inspector then asked the agents, "Do you consider this as a special site that could meet the needs of a straightforward housing development – or as an exception site perhaps?

Mr Cottrell replied, " It had been considered at an early stage to release some of the proposed housing on the open market, but it was soon realised that it went against the viability of the scheme we are trying to create.

"The landowner Ben Jones wants to leave a legacy which doesn't involve an instant financial gain and focuses on a senior care village environment being built within a desirable landscape."

Mr Davies agreed that the proposal looked acceptable on the plans, but added, "I feel that set against the site's historical buildings in such a sensitive location a development as large as this is a major issue.

"It's difficult to see how to deal with it within the LDP especially as I don't see how the road network could take much more in the way of traffic movements."

Ms Powell added, "Just because something appears difficult doesn't mean a solution cannot be found. A large number of jobs will be created along with the potential for a number of small businesses. It would be a significant economic benefit to the area.

"There would be an increase in traffic movements, but generally this would be off peak, so the impact would be different from a normal development.

"For those living on site there would be many social benefits along with an increased sense of security. "

Mr Davies concluded, "We don't feel it's a suitable location as it's the scale of development that worries me."

However Mr Cottrell added, "This site proposes a unique development. It's the landowner's ambition to create a lasting legacy. It's a first class development which fulfils a genuine desire to map out the future of the historic farm complex."

RED HART, LLANVAPLEY

FORMER publican Jim Sharp told the inspector that he would like to challenge Monmouthshire's classification of Llanvapley as a minor village and seek its reclassification to a main village, while, at the same time seeking his own site for three dwellings to be included in the Local Development Plan.

Mr Sharp said, "There seems little emphasis in keeping villages alive in Monmouthshire. With its limited access Llanddewi Rhydderch is classed as a main village, so why cannot a so-called minor village Llanvapley be classed the same way? Llanfapley is well connected as it straddles the through road between Abergavenny and Monmouth."

Mr Sharp then informed the inspector that the land behind The Red Hart, which he has put forward for the development of three units, is on a slope but will be sited well above the floodplain.

Martin Davies, the authority's development plans manager said, "It has always been our policy to allow for affordable housing to be built in rural villages.

"In Llanvapley we assessed suitable locations for low cost housing however the landowners of the sites we looked at didn't want to put their land forward.

"However this particular scheme has not been included as it revolves around the planning history of the Red Hart itself.

"This site has had a chequered history including this authority refusing to allow it to become residential, a conclusion that the Welsh Government inspector agreed with at appeal.

"Today it is no longer trading as a pub, but in planning terms it is still regarded as a public house.

"If we allowed this development to go ahead the pub's car park would be used to access the dwellings and in turn reduce the prospect of the Red Hart ever opening again.

"In general terms the site could be used for a small development, but it's the access over the land of the disputed pub which worries us and therefore the long term viability of the pub without adequate parking. "

MORE FROM THE INQUIRY NEXT WEEK