Agenda No. 1
HERTFORDSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE
23 OCTOBER 2012 AT 10.00 AM
STEVENAGE BOROUGH COUNCIL
APPLICATION FOR THE VARIATION OF CONDITION 3 OF PLANNING PERMSSION 2/0450-10 TO AMEND THE ALL WEATHER PITCH LEVEL AND THE INTRODUCTION OF A SECTION OF ACOUSTIC FENCING ADJACENT TO THE ALL WEATHER PITCH AT MARRIOTTS SCHOOL, TELFORD AVENUE, STEVENAGE, HERTFORDSHIRE, SG2 0AN
Report of the Chief Executive & Director of Environment
Contact: Chay Dempster Tel: 01992 556211
Local Member: Robin Parker
1. Purpose of Report
1.1 To consider planning application ref 2/0425-12 which seeks to alter the surface level of the AWP granted under 2/0450-10.
2. Summary
2.1 Planning permission for the erection of the new school buildings and development of the All Weather Pitch (AWP) was granted in outline in 2008 (2/0461-08) and with full permission in 2010 (2/0450-10).
2.2 The finish surface level of the AWP as approved is 119.5m. This application seeks to raise the finish surface level by 1.5m to 121m.
2.3 The main issues for consideration of the application are noise, light, and traffic.
2.4 The noise impact assessment shows that the change in the level of the AWP from 119.5 to 121m and erection of additional timber acoustic barrier around the north and north east corner of the AWP would ensure noise reaching neighbouring properties is at an acceptable level, not exceeding 55dB, and no worse than under the approved scheme.
2.5 The raising of the surface level of the AWP, made possible by the retention of some of the demolition material on site, would halve the number of HGV movements associated with the demolition phase.
2.6 The lighting associated with the scheme is the minimum necessary for the safe operation of AWP. The proposed 1.5m increase in the height of the lighting columns would not significantly increase light spill/ light trespass to levels that may cause a nuisance outside of the site.
3. Conclusion
3.1 The report concludes that the raising of the surface of the AWP by 1.5m would not result in an unacceptable impact in terms of noise affecting neighbouring properties and light spill would be adequately contained within the application site.
3.2 The retention of a greater proportion of demolition material on site for use in the foundation of the AWP would significantly decrease the number of lorry movements to and from the site during demolition.
3.3 The proposal would not result in any significant adverse impacts in terms of landscape or for the operation/ management of the school.
3.4 The proposal is in accordance with the relevant policies of the development plan and accordingly it is recommended planning permission is granted, subject to conditions as follows:
i) Time limit – the development to commence within three years to comply with the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
ii) Acoustic fencing – (a) section of acoustic barrier (2.5m minimum height and timber construction) to be erected along the northern end and eastern corner of the AWP (b) continuation of the acoustic barrier on the eastern boundary (minimum height 1m). Reason; in the interests of residential amenity
iii) Lighting scheme – details of lighting units (type, design, lux etc.) to be submitted. Reason in the interests of residential amenity / energy efficiency.
iv) Demolition Plan – detailed plan (timescales, vehicle routing, hours of operation, traffic regulation, information newsletters) to be submitted for approval. Reason: in the interests of highway safety.
v) Dust suppression scheme – to be submitted and implemented in full during demolition phase. Reason: in the interests of residential amenity.
vi) Survey of existing road conditions – survey of existing road conditions and remediation plan for Telford Avenue/ Newton Road to be submitted. Reason: in the interests of highway safety
vii) Mud/ debris on public highway - measures to be taken to ensure mud/ debris is not deposited on public highway by appropriate wheel cleaning facilities within the site and passage of an appropriate road sweeper. Reason: in the interests of highway safety
4. The application site and surroundings
4.1 The application site is located in the Chells area of Stevenage. The site is surrounded by housing in Telford Avenue, Nash Close, Wren Close, and Priestley Road to the north and east, Brittain Way to the south and Fairlands Valley Park to the west. The site is owned by Hertfordshire County Council and is just over 11 hectares in area.
5. Background
5.1 Outline planning permission was granted in 2008 (2/0461-08) for the redevelopment and expansion of Marriotts School to 8Fe and co-location with Lonsdale School, followed by full permission in 2010 (2/0450-10). This is an application to vary condition 3 of 2/0450-10 to replace the approved plans as they relate to site levels, contours, and landscaping with a revised set of plans to show the change in levels
5.2 Both the 2008 and 2010 schemes showed the AWP in the northern part of the site following demolition of the existing school buildings. The northern part of the site was preferred because of the close relationship with the expanded gym centre and accessibility for community use from Telford Avenue.
5.3 Notwithstanding there were objections to the potential noise generated from the AWP in that location, planning permission was granted subject to conditions, to minimise noise, requiring: (1) erection of a section of acoustic fencing along the eastern boundary of the site with 136 Telford Avenue, (2) restricted hours of use of the AWP (no later than 9pm weekdays, 4pm Saturdays and 2 pm Sundays), and (3) setting a maximum permitted noise from the site of 55dB.
6. Proposal
6.1 The proposal is to raise the finish surface level of the All Weather Pitch to approximately the same level as the adjoining land, although it will still be approximately 0.5m below adjoining ground level in the south east corner.
6.2 The finish surface level of the AWP is proposed to be 121m, which is some 1.5m higher than the finish level shown on the approved plans, in which the surface level was to be sunk below adjoining ground level (119.5m).
6.3 The existing site levels range between 122m on the eastern side of the site falling to 119.5 on the western side of the site.
6.4 In the proposed scheme the surface level of the AWP would be raised to almost the same level as surrounding land by using demolition material from the old school buildings.
6.5 To create a level surface at 121m it will be necessary to reduce (cut in) the surface levels on the eastern side of the site by approximately 1m, and to increase (in fill) the surface level on the western side by approximately 1.5m.
6.6 In considering the approved scheme some thought was given to the mitigation effect of having the pitch sunken below adjoining ground level.
6.7 To mitigate the rise in level additional mitigation is proposed in the form of a section of acoustic barrier located along the north end and north east corner of the AWP. The proposed acoustic barrier will be timber construction to a height of 2.5m with a minimum surface density of 15kg/m2. The proposed acoustic barrier is in addition to the acoustic barrier to be erected along the eastern boundary under the permitted scheme.
6.8 The base for the AWP will be constructed using secondary aggregate from crushed concrete from the school buildings. This will reduce the volume of material to be removed from the site by approximately 5,000cu.m. This will significantly reduce HGV traffic during demolition by approximately 1,440 movements (720in/ 720 out).
7. Policy
7.1 The main policy considerations for this proposal are contained in the Stevenage District Plan Second Review 1991-2011, East of England Plan 2007, and the National Planning Policy Framework 2012.
Stevenage District Plan Second Review 1991-2011
TW1 (Sustainable Development) requires all development to be carried out consistently with the principles of sustainable development
TW2 (Structural Open Space) states development proposals will not be permitted where they would have an unacceptable adverse impact on structural open spaces (e.g. Fairlands Valley Park) in terms of the role or character of the open space.
TW9 (Quality in Design) requires development to meet a high standard of design in terms the built form of development, its external appearance, and integration with existing development and areas of open space
Policy EN10 (Green Links) - development proposals which would be harmful to the character of green links will not be permitted.
Policy EN27 (Noise Pollution) states noise generating development proposals will only be permitted if they are not liable to result in unacceptable noise exposure to noise sensitive uses nearby. Where planning permission is granted for development, conditions may be imposed to ensure that provision is made to control the level of noise emitted.
Policy EN29 (Light Pollution) states development that incorporates floodlighting will not be permitted unless it can be demonstrated that the (a) the scheme provides the minimum amount of lighting required to meet operational requirements (b) potential pollution from glare and light spillage is minimised; (c) there would not be an unacceptable impact on residential amenity and the local environment; and (d) there would not be an unacceptable visual impact on the character or openness of the countryside.
Policy EN38 (Energy Conservation and Supply) requires proposals to demonstrate energy efficiency in terms of (a) use of energy efficient and energy conservation technologies; and (b) sustainable forms of energy supply including renewable sources where viable
8. Consultations
8.1 Stevenage Borough Council Environmental Health considers there will be a high likelihood of complaints relating to light intrusion and noise disturbance.
8.2 Hertfordshire County Council as highway authority does not wish to restrict the grant of planning permission noting that the proposal would reduce the number of HGV movements on the local road network compared to the approved scheme. The reduction in the overall material to be transported off site would reduce the number of lorry movements by 720 lorry loads (or a total of 1,440 two-way movements) on the local road network. This represents an additional 5 lorry loads per day (one way) over a 25 day period.
8.3 Sport England raises no objection, noting that the proposed change in levels would not affect the size or siting of the AWP and would not be considered to have any adverse impact on the proposed sports facility. The proposed acoustic fence is welcomed in principle as this would reduce potential noise impact on nearby residential properties from the AWP.
8.4 The Environment Agency raises no objection
Third Party representations
8.5 The application has been advertised by way of site notice, press notice and a total of 175 letters sent to individual properties within 100m of the site. There have been 2 objections to the application raising the following concerns:
Noise
§ the AWP should be recessed below surface level or moved to a more suitable location
§ the pitch level should remain as originally approvedwith an adequate acoustic fence erected around the AWP
§ residents were told the spoil would be used to create an additional sound barrier
§ the acoustic fencing erected along the eastern boundary is completely ineffective,
§ the developer made commitments to erect an acoustic fence around the AWP at previous residents meetings, but these promises were not been honoured
§ everything possible should be done to minimise noise, including not raising the level of the AWP
§ the application still includes a spectator seating area which raised concerns on the original application
Lighting
§ the height increase of light columns will create an eyesore,
§ light from the columns will affect neighbouring properties
§ assurances were given that the height of floodlights would be below the line of sight
§ the application does not include information on the impact on light spill from raising the height of the lighting columns
9. Planning Issues
9.1 The main issues for consideration in this application are:
§ Noise
§ Lighting
§ Traffic
Noise
9.2 The noise impact assessment submitted for the permitted scheme indicated that noise associated with the AWP would not exceed 55dB, which is the level at which World Health Organisation considers may lead to negative impacts.
9.3 The noise impact assessment indicated that if the AWP was to be used at the same time as both of the Multi Use Games Areas noise may slightly exceed 55dB. Notwithstanding this, the condition set 55dB as the maximum permissible noise. The school would be then be responsible for ensuring that noise from sporting activities does not exceed 55dB through timetabling sessions to avoid using the AWP at the same time as both MUGAs.
9.4 The extant planning permission (2/0450-10) included a condition to limit permissible noise from the site to a maximum of 55dB, in the interests of residential amenity.
9.5 As part of the current application a new noise impact assessment has been submitted. This concludes that noise should be no worse than in the permitted scheme provided that a satisfactory acoustic barrier is erected around the northern end and north eastern corner of AWP to a height of 2.5m. This would be in addition to the 1.8m acoustic barrier along the eastern boundary provided by the approved scheme.
9.6 Officers are therefore satisfied that sufficient information has been provided to demonstrate that the development would not cause unacceptable noise exposure to neighbouring properties. The proposal is therefore considered to comply with District Plan Policy EN27. It would therefore be inappropriate to consider further restrictions on the permitted hours of use.
9.7 To be effective the acoustic barrier must have no air gaps and be constructed with a surface density of 15kg/m2. It is noted that sections of the recently erected acoustic fence along the eastern boundary have gaps where panels have become separated. The condition requires a detailed specification for the new section of acoustic fence and repair of the existing acoustic fence.
9.8 With regards to the concerns that the steps beside the AWP may be used as a spectator area which would create additional noise, these steps are designed as an informal seating area during the school day and would be of limited use as a formal spectator area as there is no rain canopy.