Agenda No



Agenda Item No.

1

HERTFORDSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE

TUESDAY 2 MARCH 2010 AT 10.00 AM

NORTH HERTS DISTRICT

THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW MAINSTREAM SECONDARY SCHOOL

AT LAND AT GREAT ASHBY, STEVENAGE / WESTON FOR THE RELOCATION OF THE THOMAS ALLEYNE HIGH SCHOOL –SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT

Report of the Director of Environment and Commercial Services

Contact: Chay Dempster Tel: 01992 556211

Local Member: A F Hunter Adjoining Local Member: PJ Bibby

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To consider the supplementary issues raised at the meeting of the Development Control Committee on 19 January 2010 in connection with planning application ref 1/1349-09 for the proposed relocation of Thomas Alleyne School to land at Great Ashby, Stevenage/Weston.

2. Background

2.1 The application is submitted by the County Property Officer on behalf of the Children, Schools and Families (CSF) service of Hertfordshire County Council for the construction of a new mainstream secondary school (Use Class D1) and associated facilities on land in the Metropolitan Green Belt north east of Great Ashby, Stevenage. The application proposes the relocation of the Thomas Alleyne School from its current site in Old Town Stevenage to the application site.

2.2 The report to the meeting of the Development Control Committee of the

19 January 2010 (‘the main committee report’) sets out the background details in relation to this application, with reference to the site location, site description and proposed development, and the full assessment of the planning issues in relation to this application. The main committee report should be read alongside this report.

2.3 At that meeting the Committee resolved:

That consideration of outline planning application ref 1/1349-09 for the

proposed relocation of Thomas Alleyne School to land at Great Ashby, Weston / Stevenage, be deferred to enable the following to be provided: -

a) information on likely on site parking to be provided to include 6th form parking to enable the concerns over foreseen on street parking to be assessed,

b) information on the number of trees likely to be removed in providing the access road and the likely number to be provided as part of the landscaping scheme,

c) information that demonstrates the likely growth in the need for school places in the north of Stevenage,

d) any further information that will assist the Committee in considering whether the special circumstances involved with the current outline planning application have been met and in particular whether the St Nicholas Park site is or is not a suitable alternative site.”

2.4 The aim of this report is to provide members with further information/ clarification on specific issues raised at the earlier committee in relation to:

(a) the need for additional school places in north east Stevenage

(b) the suitability of alternative sites, notably St. Nicholas Park

(c) transport, access and parking issues

(d) confirmation of the numbers of trees to be removed, and

(e) the possible prematurity of a decision in advance of any firm proposals on the

strategic growth of Stevenage in this area

3. Conclusions

3.1 The application proposes inappropriate development in the Green Belt. In determining this application considerable weight should be given to the longstanding policies aimed at protecting the Green Belt.

These make clear that development that would be harmful to the Green Belt should only be permitted in very special circumstances, and, where it can be shown that harm to the Green Belt and other harm would be clearly outweighed by other material considerations.

3.2 In your officers’ view, the need for additional secondary school places, particularly in north east Stevenage, is capable of being such a very special circumstance.

3.3 Further, as has been demonstrated, the alternative sites survey has shown that there are no other alternative brownfield sites in the locality. The only other alternative greenfield non-Green Belt site in the vicinity of the area of need is St. Nicholas Park. Your officers consider that the development of St.Nicholas Park would result in the loss of open space and facilities accessible to the local community, where there is already an identified shortfall in parks and open spaces in this part of the town. This would result in significant harm which is considered to outweigh the harm to the Green Belt and other environmental harm caused by the application proposals. It is not apparent that development of either of the other two identified Green Belt sites would result in substantially less harm to Green Belt or other environmental harm than the application proposals.

3.4 Having regard to these two very special circumstances, and to the other planning policy considerations set out in the main report, your officers are of the view that very special circumstances exist sufficient to clearly outweigh the Green Belt and other environmental harm caused by the development, and, that taking all other matters into consideration, planning permission should be granted.

Planning Considerations

The need for additional school places in north east Stevenage

4.1 The main report set out the applicant’s case for the need for additional secondary school places in Stevenage and your officer’s assessment of it.

4.2 The pupil projections to 2031 contained in the Supporting Planning Statement (June 2009) were originally carried out in 2006 and were used to inform the public consultation exercise ‘Stevenage review of secondary school places’ (May 2007). The projections were taken from the Population and Pupil Forecasting Model that was specifically created in 2001 to model long-term population trends.

4.3 The Children Schools and Families (CSF) Service is now able to carry out its own medium-term pupil projections using a bespoke software system that takes into account a range of factors including: 0-5 year olds registered with general practitioners; actual pupil numbers in each school year group; primary pupils moving to secondary schools; mobility trends and new housing developments, and migration to and from other authorities and the independent sector.

4.4 Unlike the projections derived from the Population and Pupil Forecasting Model, the projections carried out by CSF are broken down by year group and thus include projections of the anticipated number of ‘Year 7’ students, which is the entry year for secondary schools.

4.5 These figures were published in December 2009 in the document ‘Meeting rising demand for school places’ which forecasts the number of Year 7 students (secondary school age) across the County for each year up to 2020/21. The following table sets out the projections for Stevenage.

Forecast of secondary school demand in Stevenage.

[pic]

Source: Meeting rising demand for school places

4.6 The increase in demand for school places in Stevenage is based on increasing birth rate, reflecting the national trend, and the housing projections taken from the East of England Plan up to 2021 (including the west of Stevenage development).

4.7 Based on an average of 30 pupils per year group and a minimum requirement of a 5% margin for parental choice, the CSF projections imply a secondary school capacity requirement of 46FE (rounded) in 2016/17 and 53FE (rounded) in 2020/21

4.8 This requirement compares with the 47FE of secondary school capacity being provided by the BSF Programme and the 6FE of capacity to be provided at the recently-permitted 3,600 dwelling development at West Stevenage (total 53FE).

4.9 The projections show that the additional capacity requirement can be met through the County Council’s BSF programme. Also, it is evident that delays to the delivery of the programme can be expected to lead to shortages in capacity from around 2013/14 onwards.

4.10 Secondary school pupil forecasts beyond 2021 are inevitably more speculative, not least because they cannot be informed by live birth data. There is an anticipation in the Regional Plan, however, that housing growth at Stevenage will continue at the same rate as 2001-2021, which would add a further 8,000 dwellings.

4.11 The most recent County Council figures for the number of secondary school age pupils living in post code areas in north east Stevenage show that the number of pupils has risen from 1,040 pupils, as quoted in the last committee report, to 1,100.

4.12 Furthermore, the latest figures for GP registrations of the number of children born to families living in the St Nicholas and Great Ashby wards is also increasing. It is forecast that some 240 secondary school age pupils (Year 7) can be expected to live in areas north of Martins Way by the time the school is planned to open in 2015. That number of pupils would be sufficient to populate a secondary school of 8FE. The clear indication is that a new secondary school would be justified in this part of Stevenage based on existing pupil numbers alone.

4.13 It can be concluded that the long term need for additional capacity will not be remedied until such time as a new school is built in north east Stevenage. Until then, children living north of Martins Way will continue to have to travel to other schools across the town.

4.14 Beyond 2021 Stevenage is expected to provide further housing, and CSF is currently in discussion with Stevenage Borough Council and North Herts District Council about a number of possible options for meeting post -2021 requirements. Further housing growth at north-east Stevenage is, of course, likely (but cannot yet be guaranteed) as part of the emerging SNAP Action Plan proposals. However, at the present time, the expansion of the Great Ashby school beyond 8FE is not considered likely to be required because the current ‘bulge’ should have levelled out by the time that the new housing comes along, freeing up capacity for children born to the future residents.

Alternative Sites

4.15 Alternative sites can be a material consideration in circumstances where the proposal provides a clear public benefit, but would inevitably have an adverse effect or disadvantage for the public or a section of it, and, where there exists an alternative site for the same project which would not have those adverse effects or would not have them to the same extent.

4.16 Here, if Members are satisfied that the case for need is satisfactorily demonstrated, they then need to be satisfied additionally that there is no alternative site that could reasonably come forward to meet the identified need, and, that would cause less harm to the Green Belt and environmental interests, than the application site.

4.17 The main committee report set out the details of possible alternative sites that were considered for the new school, shown on Map 8 in Appendix 10. The main report includes an assessment of the individual sites (7.37 to 7.44 & 7.52 to 7.58).

4.18 In respect of St Nicholas Park (‘the park’) identified as Site B, the site has a central location and is surrounded by residential development. In sequential terms the park is within the built up area, and therefore as a matter of principle, should be considered a more suitable site in principle for development than a Green Belt site.

4.19 However, the park provides a number of community facilities, including the pavilion with changing facilities, showers, kitchen facility and a hall available for bookings. There are 3 x junior football pitches, 3 x 7-a-side football pitches, the bowling green, basket ball hoop, kick wall, as well as 2 x play areas equipped for toddlers, juniors and teens and the St Nicholas Play Centre.

4.20 Stevenage Borough Council is responsible for facilities at the park and confirms that the facilities are well used by the community, including:

The pavilion is available for booking for any community group. There are a number of regular bookings for pre-school nursery groups and organisations such as Cubs and Brownies.

▪ The play centre runs activities for children after school and through the holidays and currently there is a project to erect further play equipment.

▪ The football pitches are used by local football clubs throughout the weekends through the season. The bowling green is used through out the week during the season.

▪ One of the play areas has just had a complete refit at a cost of £181,000.

▪ There is extensive casual use of the park, including dog walkers, who may not use the actual physical facilities of the park but are none the less using the park.

▪ There are also a number of footpaths crossing the site linking residential development surrounding the site, one such route links The Leys Primary School on the southern side of the site with homes north of the park.

4.21 Stevenage Borough Council has written to raise objections to the use of St Nicholas Park (letter of 23 October 2010) on the grounds that:

the park is a Public Open Space (POS) well related to the existing housing in the local area

the park has significant usage, provides good access to a wide range of community facilities, with no major issues with quality of provision,

the park is located in an area where there is a significant deficiency in the amount of recreation space available,

the open spaces in the town are safeguarded by local plan policies opposing development for alternative uses

24 it is anticipated that there would be a strong level of local opposition to proposals to develop the park that it would be duty bound to consider

4.22 It has been suggested that the development of the park for a secondary school would avoid development in the Green Belt, however, if the park were developed as a school the existing facilities would need to be re-provided elsewhere, which given the shortage of available space within this part of the town would inevitably mean a Green Belt site.

4.23 In policy terms, the development of essential small-scale facilities for outdoor sport and recreation is appropriate in the Green Belt. Therefore, re-provision of the existing grass playing pitches (existing area 6.61ha) would be unlikely to raise any Green Belt policy objection. However, the re-location of the equipped play area, adventure play ground, children’s play area, community pavilion and play centre (existing area 5.73ha) are, it is considered, inappropriate development and would inevitably lead to Green Belt policy objections.

4.24 Even if the Green Belt objections could be justified on the basis of very special circumstances, the issue of accessibility would be more difficult to overcome for the reason that facilities located in the Green Belt would be far less accessible to the existing community. The loss of this valued Public Open Space would, it is considered, have a significant impact on local amenity, in an area where there is known to be a shortfall in parks and public open space, as shown by the latest PPG17 audit. There is also a strong policy objection to the development of Stevenage parks and this would need to be given significant weight given the harm to local amenity in this case. It is also a consideration that Stevenage Borough Council, the landowners, local planning authority, and open space provider in respect of St. Nicholas Park hold strong objections to its development for alternative uses and would clearly be an unwilling participant in any such proposals to develop the park.

4.25 In terms of space and current uses within the park, it is acknowledged that the park is of sufficient size, some 12.34 hectares, to meet the minimum size requirement for an 8FE school (10 hectares). Even if it were possible to relocate the playing fields to an alternative site, the remaining land (6.61ha) would not be large enough for an 8FE secondary school. The fencing off of this area for use by a secondary school would also impact on the access to the community facilities and areas of informal space.

4.26 With regard to all of the considerations, your officers consider that St. Nicholas Park is not a suitable site for a new 8FE secondary school due to the loss of public open space in this area where there is an existing shortage of such space.

4.27 In respect of the robustness of the alternative site search, the consideration of sites located on the urban fringe with a minimum 10 hectares, taking account of constraints like major woodland areas, sites of ecological importance, sites of archaeological importance, and conservation areas, parkland sites associated with large country houses, and areas of public open space is considered to be sound and reasonable basis for such an assessment. Your officers are satisfied with its findings and would agree that no more suitable alternative site exists in north east Stevenage, taking account of all planning constrains, including those identified on Map 8.

Harm to the Green Belt

4.28 PPG2 states that “the fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open; the most important attribute of Green Belts is their openness”.

4.29 There is no doubt that the proposal would result in harm in terms of loss of openness, however, this would be partially mitigated in the long term by landscaping. In terms of its scale, much of the site would be open grass playing fields which retain openness across much of the site. The buildings are contained between two areas of woodland which reduce the overall impact on openness.

4.30 With regard to the impact of the proposals on the purposes of the Green Belt, there is no doubt that the proposal would result in encroachment into the countryside, however this would be limited, as far as possible, by retaining the building area close to the built up area.

4.31 Within the site some remnants of a parkland setting could be retained with large areas of open playing fields which would restrict the urbanising impact of development. The retained open landscape to the north and east would prevent the merging of existing settlements

Transportation, access and car use

4.32 The development of a new secondary school in the Green Belt clearly has implications for patterns and modes of travel, which needs to be carefully considered with the regards to the principles of sustainable development.

4.33 Choice of travel mode has an important implication for sustainable development. Nationally, journeys to and from school by staff and pupils and travel on school business account for 16% of the schools carbon footprint.

4.34 The civil engineering consultants have devised a set of interim transportation proposals (‘interim proposals’) to ensure a smooth transition from the existing site in the Old Town. The interim proposals include provision/recommendations for:

▪ Targets for cycling and bus use

▪ Improvements to foot/cycle path link between St. Nicholas Park and Great Ashby

▪ Provision for increased bus services to Great Ashby

▪ Sufficient on-site parking provided for staff and visitors

4.35 The latest available travel mode data for the Thomas Alleyne School in its existing location is recorded below.

Thomas Alleyne School – current travel mode

|Mode |2008/09 |

|car or car share |23% |

|Walk |56% |

|Cycle |14% |

|public transport |6% |

|Taxi |1% |

|Source: Transport Assessment – November 2009 |

| |

4.36 In the existing situation the numbers of pupils walking or cycling to the Thomas Alleyne School is relatively high, although, so too is the number of pupils travelling to school by car. This could be explained by the distance pupils live from school currently, for example, of the 836 existing Thomas Alleyne pupils 12% live within 1km of the school, and 59% live at least 1.5km from the school.

4.37 Across Stevenage schools the proportion of pupils using each mode of travel is

Travel mode across Stevenage schools (2007)[1]

| |Barclay |Barnwell |Heathcote |Marriotts |Nobel |Thomas Alleyne |

|Car/taxi |11% |21% |14% |18% |18% |18% |

|Walk |80 |63 |61 |62 |72 |69 |

|Cycle |8 |10 |8 |15 |6 |5 |

|Bus |1 |6 |17 |5 |4 |8 |

|Source: school census data (2007) in Transport Assessment (November 2009) |

4.38 Compared to the national average Stevenage has a high level of pupils walking to school but a relatively low level of pupils using public transport.

Travel mode – Stevenage / national

| |Stevenage average |National average |

|Car or car share |18% |19% |

|Walking |68 |44 |

|Cycling |9 |3 |

|public transport |5 |32 |

|Source: Towards a Schools Carbon Management Plan – June 2009 |

4.39 Nationally, 53% of children who travel to school by car live less than 1.5 miles from the school[2]. This is significant because 1 – 1.5km is generally accepted as highly viable distance for walking and cycling.

4.40 The existing Thomas Alleyne School catchment generates some 150 car trips, which equates to 18% of the 836 pupils. It is estimated that of the 150 trips, 83% are related to those pupils who live 1.5km or more from the school and just 4% from those pupils living within 1km of the school.

4.41 It is clear that the distance from school plays a part in the decision of travel mode. The Transport Assessment acknowledges that the greatest impact in reducing the number of vehicle trips generated by the new school is likely to be achieved by encouraging local pupils to attend the school. If pupils living in/near Great Ashby can be encouraged to attend Thomas Alleyne School for several years in advance of the move then a high percentage of the lower forms will be populated by Great Ashby students when the move occurs. Local students will not require car transport as such short distances are easy to walk or cycle along existing and proposed routes.

4.42 With regard to parking, in line with the aims of sustainable development in PPS1 and PPG13 it will be important not to over-provide parking spaces where this might encourage car use, but also it is important to guard against creating on-street parking problems.

4.43 The total level of parking proposed is 205 spaces. This falls slightly below the maximum PPG13 provision of 232 spaces for a school of this size. PPG13 guides local planning authorities to consider parking standards as part of a range of measures, including, where appropriate, contributions towards sustainable transport services and infrastructure.

4.44 In terms of 6th form parking requirements, it should be remembered that the majority of 6th formers will not be eligible to drive until they are 17 years old, by which time many will be in their final year of school. Of those of who are able to drive, a proportion can be expected to live close to the school some of whom may chose to walk of cycle instead of driving.

4.45 In reaching a decision on an acceptable level of parking in this case consideration should also be given to: -

potential for a high proportion of local pupils to attend the school, thus reducing trips to other schools across Stevenage,

the existence of foot and cycle paths in the vicinity of the site,

the existence of interim transport proposals, including a dedicated bus service between the existing school site and the proposed school

4.46 There is an existing cycle route connecting Great Ashby Way (opposite Fairfield Way) with Mendip Way (north of Windrush Close). The application proposes to connect a new route at the mid point of the existing cycle route, which would run under the pylons to the application site. The Great Ashby residential area also has a number of shared routes suitable for cycling, including the one running alongside Mendip Way, as well as other roads in the locality which are lightly trafficked and generally suitable for cycling.

4.47 Currently nearly 15% of pupils cycle to school and there appears to be no reason why such a high percentage should not be achieved with the new school. If realised this would equate to 240 pupils. The School Travel Plan should set realistic and challenging targets. The Transport Assessment should also encourage the uptake of cycle proficiency test training and cycling club start-ups. In the final scheme detailed consideration should be given to high quality, safe and accessible cycle storage, and showers, storage and changing facilities close to the cycle storage areas.

4.48 Having regard to the package of transport proposals your officers are of the view that provision below the maximum standard would be acceptable in this case. However, if Members feel unhappy with a reduced figure, there is space within the application site to provide the additional 27 spaces. The additional spaces could be provided in the vicinity of the existing car park and building area within affecting the locations of buildings. If it is necessary to provide the maximum parking standard a condition could be used for specifying the number of parking spaces to be provided.

4.49 With regards to on-street parking problems in the locality of the site, the recommended condition to enable closure of the existing pedestrian accesses between Grampian Place and the application site, in consultation with local residents, should prevent neighbouring streets being used a cut through or for indiscriminate parking.

Impact on trees

4.50 New Spring Wood is designated Hertfordshire Wildlife Site and is indicated on the National Inventory of Woodland and Trees (England). The tree cover in New Spring Wood is formed by a combination of middle-aged Oak and Ash with older linear groups of lapsed coppice Hornbeam and mature individual Beech.

4.51 Brooches Wood (south) and Tilekiln Wood (north-west) are both defined as Ancient Woodlands i.e. they are defined as having had continuous woodland cover since at least 1600 AD. In New Spring Wood there is evidence of intensive woodland management in the past, including coppice, therefore it is not surprising that it is not recorded as Ancient Woodland. However, because New Spring Wood is located within 500m of Brooches and Tilekiln Ancient Wood the Forestry Commission was consulted on the proposals and subsequently raised no objections.

52. In response to concerns raised in respect of the number of trees to be removed for the new access (31), the Tree Survey results have been verified on site by the County Council’s Restoration Manager.

4.53 The main finding is that overall the tree survey results and methodology is sound, although there are some minor inconsistencies in the trees surveyed in New Spring Wood but that that does not affect the robustness of the survey overall.

54. The Tree Survey recorded a total of 73 trees in New Spring Wood. Each surveyed tree is marked by a numbered metal tag corresponding with the tree numbers in the Tree Survey.

55. As a proportion of the 73 surveyed trees, 31 are proposed for removal to create a new access to the main body of the site. These trees are of mixed quality (see para 5.9 of the main report) including a number are significant oak and ash specimens.

56. The Tree Survey focussed on a narrow section of the wood in the vicinity of the proposed road and access path. All of the trees that would be lost or potentially impacted by the development are included in the survey. The Restoration Manager confirms that this is sound practice as there would be no point surveying a wider section of woodland when none of the trees would be affected. Notwithstanding this, some trees/hedgerow within close proximity of the cycle way in the north part of the drop-off area were not surveyed. Although, none of these trees are proposed for removal nor would be directly affected by the development because the cycleway includes ‘no-dig’ foundations. it is suggested the survey could have shown these trees for completeness. To ensure that these trees are not affected by development a condition is recommended for tree protection throughout the construction period.

4.57 It is apparent that the Tree Survey included a small number of inconsistencies within New Spring Wood, in that a limited number of trees of ‘recordable’ size were not surveyed, although this was not more than 6 or 7 individual small trees of poor quality. The best example is shown in the photograph appended to this report. The photograph suggests that the insignificant size/quality of the tree could have been the reason it was not included in the survey.

4.58 Within the main body of the wood only 1 or 2 small poor quality trees were not surveyed. The majority are located along the southern edge of the wood close to the entry point. It should be noted that the hedgerow along the northern side of New Spring Wood was not surveyed, although the hedge does not contain any significant trees.

4.59 It was noted that the tree survey does not include the area of open space where part of the existing hedgerow would be removed, within which is a number of ‘tree like’ species would be removed. The section of hedgerow to be removed forms part of an old grown-out but continuous length of hedgerow running across the open space that would be cut in two by the access road.

4.60 The hedgerow is quite a substantial feature which was included in the Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment forming part of the EIA. The main report addressed the long term adverse visual impact associated with the loss of this part of the hedgerow (section 7).

4.61 In terms of the impact of the access proposals on New Spring Wood, it is clear that the route has been carefully adjusted to minimise tree loss and principle woodland features, notwithstanding 31 trees, including some large oak and ash specimens, would be removed. Therefore, officers are satisfied that the number of trees that need to be removed is the minimum necessary.

4.62 Although the loss of this number of is not considered to have a significant visual amenity impact in the context of the wider landscape, it would cause a permanent physical interruption to the woodland structure, resulting in a fragmented section of woodland of approximately 60m in length, which it would not be possible to mitigate in the short term.

4.63 The mitigation proposals for individual trees include ‘no dig’ foundations for the carriageway, footpaths and cycleways to protect tree routes, with full details included in the submitted Arboricultural Method Statement.

4.64 In mitigation, it is proposed to plant a large numbers of trees by way of compensatory tree planting throughout the site, and in particular, in the following areas (i) the access road area, (ii) the school car parking/building area, and (iii) the two tree screen belts along the eastern and northern boundaries.

4.65 The County Council’s Restoration Manager has assessed the indicative planting proposals shown on drawings L100, L400 and L401 and has estimated the number of replacement trees as follows:

– Access Road and drop of area (Drg L100 & L400) - 40 trees (with additional shown under the power lines)

– School Car Park/Building area (Drg L100) – 70 trees

– Eastern screenbelt (Drg L100) – 30 trees

– Northern screenbelt / Tilekiln Farm (Drg L100 & L401) – 80 trees

4.66 The total number of trees that could be planted is 220 (indicative).

67. In simple numeric terms the number of trees provided far exceeds the numbers to be removed. While it is acknowledged that large woodland trees such as oaks and ashes which have significant amenity value and cannot easily be replaced / mitigated in the short or medium term, the sheer number of replacement trees could enhance the ecological and landscape value of those parts of the site in the long term.

68. Additionally, the size of the application site provides opportunities for significant additional planting, such as, in the Dell Field. It is possible that the number of replacement trees could be significantly more than 220 trees as part of a comprehensive landscaping scheme across the site. The applicant has committed to a very significant number of replacement trees

69. It would be possible to specify the number of replacement trees in a condition, however this may be being overly prescriptive, and officers would be happier to deal with the number, size and species of replacement trees as part of a detailed landscaping scheme.

Prematurity

70. The issue of prematurity has been raised by objectors to the application and featured in debate at the last committee. In respect of this application, the issue relates to the proposals for an urban expansion of north east Stevenage (the SNAP proposals) pursuant to the requirements of the East of England Plan. This matter was addressed in paragraphs 7.67 - 7.74 of the main committee report.

71. Guidance in The Planning System: General Principles provides that refusal on grounds of prematurity may be justified where a Development Plan Document (DPD) is being prepared or is under review, but where it has not been adopted. The key issue is whether the significance of the development in question could predetermine decisions about the scale, location or phasing of new development. In other circumstances refusal on prematurity grounds will ‘not usually be justified’.

72. As previously advised, the development proposed is not considered to be so significant to affect decisions on the scale or broad location of the development required by the East of England Plan. Therefore, the application is not considered to be prejudicial to any future decision on development north of Stevenage as part of the LDF process.

Timing

4.73 To enable the development of the site, as well as making the planning application the County Council has authorised the making of a Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) for ‘all of the land interests that would be required in order to implement the planning permission’.

4.74 The making of a CPO is justified under section 530 of the Education Act 1996 which authorises a local education authority to purchase land compulsorily that is required for the purposes of any school maintained by them or which they have power to assist. Guidance in Circular 06/04 requires the Council to be satisfied that there is a compelling case in the public interest for the making of the CPO.

4.75 The County Council has set out its reasons for making the CPO, on the basis that it considers the compelling case has been established in the public interest in terms of educational need. The provision of a new school in this area will provide the appropriate solution for the layout of schools in Stevenage, commensurate with local and projected demand, and that the site is essential to locate the school and playing fields. A public inquiry is in the course of being fixed by the Secretary of State as the confirming body for summer 2010.

4.76 In considering this planning application, however, the focus is on the principle of development; with need being the principal material consideration and primary very special circumstance as explained in the main report. As timing is relevant to delivery of the new school to meet the current and growing need, Members should not further delay deciding the principle of development through this outline application

European Protected Species

4.77 The Habitat Survey forming part of the EIA identifies no record of any protected, or notably important species from within the site itself, although two European Protected Species (bats and dormice) are known to be close or within commuting distance of the site, including four species of bats at Tile Kiln Farm, and potentially bat roosts in mature trees in New Spring Wood/Tilekiln Wood and along the north east site boundary. While there are currently no records of dormice from within the application site, they are known to inhabit parts of Box Wood and Pryors Wood, which are linked to the application site by hedgerows and other woodland.

4.78 The Conservation (Natural Habitats Etc.) Regulations 1994 contains three tests which Natural England must apply in deciding whether or not to grant a licence for an activity which would harm a European Protected Species (EPS). The three tests are that:

1) the activity to be licensed must be imperative for reasons of overriding public interest (7.25 – 7.30)

2) there must be no satisfactory alternative (7.37-7.44); and

3) favourable conservation status of the species must be maintained (7.91–7.95)

4.79 A recent judgement of the High Court [Woolley vs. Cheshire East BC and Millennium Estates Ltd] confirmed that the Local Planning authority has a duty to consider the three tests in deciding whether to grant planning permission for a development which would harm a European Protected Species. The relevant government planning guidance is contained in Circular 06/05: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation.

4.80 The authority will be seen to have discharged it duty to have regard to the Directive if it considers that the requirements of the Directive are likely to be met, and it should consider refusing planning permission where it is clear or perhaps very likely that the requirements of the Directive cannot be met.

4.81 In respect of the development being imperative for reasons of overriding public interest, it is considered that the case for educational need as described in the relevant sections of this report (paras. 4.1 - 4.14) and the main report itself (para. 7.25 – 7.30) fulfil the test of public interest. In relation to there being no satisfactory alternative, this issue relates to the lack of alternative sites set out in this report (4.15 – 4.28) and the main report (7.37 – 7.44). With regard to favourable conservation status of the species being preserved, the proposals have been subject to Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). It is acknowledged that there will be some impacts on protected species, through dislocation of dormice habitats and bats feeding habitats, the overall impact on the species in the locality is limited and can be mitigated as far as possible by the conditions requiring a review of the effectiveness of the floodlighting and the preparation of a Biodiversity Conservation Management Plan to manage the woodland habitats favourably for the conservation of bats and dormice.

5. Additional consultation responses not included in the main report

5.1 The Woodland Trust, a UK woodland conservation charity, has raised concerns regarding the proximity of development to Tile Kiln Wood, and in particular the light pollution may have a serious impact on the adjacent woodland and local wildlife, maintaining that the buffering between the development and the woodland is insufficient to prevent light spill to the woodland edge and reducing the available feeding areas for brown long eared bats. It is suggested that by angling the lights away from the woodland it may reduce the amount of light spill into the woodland although it will not be possible to completely eliminate the impact. The Trust response suggests that there is a cumulative impact associated with recent housing south of the wood. It also says that there is no evidence to support the effectiveness of the proposed green bridge and as such there can be no certainty that dormouse habitats will not be fragmented. The Trust has serious concerns that development will damage ancient woodland contrary to guidance in PPS9, regional, and local planning policy.

5.2 The Forestry Commission advises of Government policy highlighting the importance of existing trees and woodland, and the clear presumption against development that results in their loss unless there are overriding public benefits arising from the development. East of England Plan (2008) Policy ENV5 confirms the “general presumption against the conversion of woodland to other land uses unless there are overriding public benefits” [ibid] “In these situations we will seek to ensure that equivalent areas of new woodland are planted in compensation.” The Forestry Commission would therefore expect significant mitigation measures to be employed.

6 Conclusions

6.1 The application proposes inappropriate development in the Green Belt. In determining this application considerable weight should be given to the longstanding policies aimed at protecting the Green Belt.

These make clear that development that would be harmful to the Green Belt should only be permitted in very special circumstances, and, where it can be shown that harm to the Green Belt and other harm would be clearly outweighed by other material considerations.

6.2 In your officers’ view, the need for additional secondary school places, particularly in north east Stevenage, is capable of being such a very special circumstance.

6.3 Further, as has been demonstrated, the alternative sites survey has shown that there are no other alternative brownfield sites in the locality. The only other alternative greenfield non Green Belt site in the vicinity of the area of need is St. Nicholas Park. Your officers consider that the development of St.Nicholas Park would result in the loss of open space and facilities accessible to the local community, where there is already an identified shortfall in parks and open spaces in this part of the town. This would result in significant harm which is considered to outweigh the harm to the Green Belt and other environmental harm caused by the application proposals. It is not apparent that development of either of the other two identified Green Belt sites would result in substantially less harm to the Green Belt or other environmental harm than the application proposals.

6.4 Having regard to these two very special circumstances, and to the other planning policy considerations set out in the main report, your officers are of the view that very special circumstances exist sufficient to clearly outweigh the Green Belt and other environmental harm caused by the development, and, that taking all other matters into consideration, planning permission should be granted.

7. Financial Implications

There are none arising from this report.

Background information used by the author in compiling this report

Planning application reference 1/1349-09 and Environmental Statement

Consultee responses

Relevant policy documents

‘Meeting rising demand for school places’ December 2009

-----------------------

[1] Whilst the tables indicate different figures for Thomas Alleyne School due to sample size, both surveys indicate a higher percentage than the national average of pupils walking to school.

[2] Towards a Schools Carbon Management Plan – June 2009 (DfES)

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download