|
Contact Officer: Alan Divall Tel: Oxford 815886
ITEM PN6
PLANNING & REGULATION COMMITTEE – 18 MAY 2009
THE CONTINUATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT PERMITTED UNDER PERMISSION V.04/08 GRANTED CONSENT ON 24/11/2008 (ERECTION OF A TRANSLUCENT POLYTHENE DOME FOR USE PART OF THE YEAR OVER EXISTING TENNIS COURTS FOR A TEMPORARY PERIOD OF FIVE YEARS) WITHOUT COMPLYING WITH CONDITION 3 (WHICH REQUIRED THAT THE DOME SHOULD NOT BE INSTALLED BEFORE THE END OF TERM 1 IN ANY SCHOOL YEAR AND MUST BE REMOVED BY THE END OF TERM 5 IN THAT YEAR) TO ALLOW THE RETENTION OF THE DOME ON SITE ALL YEAR ROUND
Report by Head of Sustainable Development
Location: King Alfred’s School (West Site), Challow Road, Wantage, Oxon, OX12 9DU.
Application No: R3.0098/09 District Council Area: Vale of White Horse
Introduction
1. Planning permission for the erection of a translucent polythene dome (for use part of the year during adverse weather conditions) over the schools existing tennis courts for a temporary period of five years was granted planning permission in April 2007. A subsequent planning application permitted in November 2008 (V.04/08) approved a number of changes to the original permission including changes to the physical appearance of the dome, clarified its hours and times of use and allowed for the use of internal lights.
2. This application now seeks to remove Condition 3 of the permission V.04/08 (which in effect requires the dome to be removed during the summer months) in order to allow the dome to remain on the site for 12 months of the year until the expiry of the current temporary planning permission in April 2012. No other changes have been applied for.
Location (Site plan) (download as .doc file)
3. King Alfred’s School (West Site) is located on Challow Road (A417) on the western edge of the built up area of Wantage. The village of East Challow is about 600 metres to the west. There are open fields to the north, west and south of the school. Site and Setting (Site plan)
4. The inflatable dome is located on the existing tennis courts between the existing school buildings and the school caretaker’s bungalow in the north east corner of the site. The dome is currently bounded by 3m high fencing. There are a number of trees on the Challow Road frontage around the caretaker’s bungalow and there is a substantial hedge along the eastern boundary of the school site.
5. The nearest residential properties to the development site are in Warmans Close about 20 metres to the east.
Background and Details of the Development
6. Planning permission for the erection of the dome was originally granted in April 2007. The school considered the use of the dome essential in order to improve its physical education curriculum in line with its status as a specialist sports college during the winter months. A subsequent planning permission V.04/08 in November 2008 permitted amendments to the original permission granted in April 2007 (Annex 1) (download as .doc file). This planning permission included a number of conditions restricting the use of the dome for school use only and that it should not be used out of school hours, during weekends or school holidays and that the permission was also for a 5 year period only ending at the end of April 2012. The permission also included conditions requiring that the dome should not be installed on the tennis courts before the end of term 1 in any school year and that it should be dismantled by the end of term 5 in that year. Other conditions imposed included that no-additional lighting should be installed without prior approval, the use of the existing lighting should be restricted to certain times and that details of existing landscaping should be submitted and approved.
7. The planning permission granted in November 2008 also included an informative that urged that the school establish a liaison group with local residents, most particularly to try to agree appropriate times and uses of the dome that were acceptable to all parties. Two liaison meetings have been held during January and March 2009 with local residents, the local Parish Council and other parties (including OCC planning officers). The liaison meetings were chaired by the Mayor of Wantage and allowed lines of communication to develop between those parties involved and allowed concerns and issues to be discussed.
8. During the liaison meetings a number of issues of ongoing concern were raised by local residents, these included:
· noise from children and staff engaged in activities in the dome; · continual, ambient noise from the dome’s compressor (particularly at night); · inconsiderate parking by school visitors outside of school hours.
9. As a result of the liaison group meetings the school have now proposed the following:
(a) to not seek any community use of the dome outside of the times of use already approved in the current planning permission (this is intended to alleviate concerns over inconsiderate parking by visitors outside of school hours);
(b) to install effective sound reduction measures to the dome’s compressor;
(c) to install effective additional sound deadening features within the dome itself;
(d) to apply to remove Condition 3 of the school’s current planning permission to allow the retention of the dome on site for 12 months of the year.
10. The only change that the school are now seeking to their current planning permission is the removal of Condition 3 (Annex 1). By removing this condition the school would be allowed to keep the dome erected on site for 12 months of the year until the expiry of the temporary permission in April 2012. The school are seeking removal of this limitation so that they can provide a high quality sport and PE experience for students during unpredictable weather in the summer months. This is of particular importance to King Alfred’s as a specialist sports college. The school have stressed in the application that indoor use is very much a second best option for most sports in the summer and early autumn and that students will, in the first instance, work outside where appropriate and possible. The school are not applying to amend or remove any other conditions.
Consultations
11. The consultation period on this application ran from 8 April to 1 May 2009.
Vale of White Horse District Council (Planning Development Control) – The District Planning Authority raises no objections to the application but continues to have reservations about the development and regrets the erosion of conditions attached to the temporary planning permission. The District Council, however, is mindful that this is a temporary structure. The expectation is that a more appropriate and permanent structure will be proposed after the temporary period has expired and that the temporary permission will not be renewed.
Vale of White Horse District Council (Environmental Protection Team) - No further comments to make on this application.
Wantage Town Council – No response received to date.
East Challow Parish Council – Object for the following reasons:
· Not clear why all year round use is proposed when the school originally only requested winter use; · The size and height of the dome towers over neighbouring properties; · Unclear if sound proofing measures will be effective, these should be shown to work before permission is granted; · The dome should be relocated to open ground south of the school and could remain here all year and have extended use; · No plans put forward for a permanent building.
North Wessex Downs AONB - No response received to date.
Sport England – Support application.
Transport Development Control – No objection.
Third Party Representations (copies of these letters are available in the Member’s Resource Centre)
12. Six letters have been received from local residents who object to retaining the dome on site during the summer, their reasons are:
· continued noise from activities in dome during the summer months; · continued noise from the dome’s compressor at all times; · although the school have stated that use during the summer months will be limited it will still be used at some point; · visual impact of the dome up to the period of 2012 and the possibility of it remaining on site for a further period beyond; · residents should be given a break during the summer months from having to look at the dome; · the sound proofing measures proposed may not be carried out and may not work; · sound proofing measures should be carried out regardless of whether the dome remains on site all year round; · concerns over parking; · the dome should be moved elsewhere on the school site; · not enough communication has taken place between the school and local residents; · the dome is more noticeable and the loss of amenity for residents is greater in the summer months; · a permanent building should be provided elsewhere on the site; · the dome does not comply with planning policies; · the landscaping will not be effective in the timescale for the temporary structure.
Relevant Planning Policies
13. Oxfordshire Structure Plan 2016 (OSP)
G2 – All development to be of a scale and type appropriate to the site and its surroundings and not cause harm to the character and amenities of the area.
G3 – The provision of recreation, leisure, educational, health and community facilities will be encouraged where there are deficiencies.
14. Vale of White Horse Local Plan 2011 (VWHLP)
G35 – Development should only be permitted in existing settlements if it makes efficient use of land and buildings and should not involve loss of important local facilities or harm site or its surroundings, or create a poor quality environment.
DC1 – Development will be permitted provided that it is of a high quality design and the layout, scale, mass, height, detailing, materials used do not adversely impact on the local area.
DC9 – Development will not be permitted if it would unacceptably harm the amenities of neighbouring properties and the wider environment in terms of amongst other things - loss of privacy, daylight or sunlight, dominance or visual intrusion or noise.
NE6 – Development which would be visually prominent, would detract from views or would spoil the appreciation of the landscape quality of the North Wessex Downs AONB will not be permitted.
Comments of the Head of Sustainable Development
15. In my view the main issues to be considered in deciding this application relate to the impact on neighbouring residents and the wider environment as a result of:
(i) noise from within the dome; (ii) noise from the dome’s compressor; (iii) visual impact of the dome being retained on site all year round.
(i) Continued noise from within the dome
16. As highlighted in paragraph 8 of this report the noise that is generated from within the dome during its use in school hours has continued to cause concern for some local residents. As a result the school are proposing to install internal partitions in order to help reduce the noise that is generated during certain activities. The school are however only proposing to install these should they be granted permission to allow the dome to remain on site for 12 months of the year. 17. The erection of these partitions would involve the following (a diagram is shown at Annex 2) (download as .doc file):
(i) The construction of two internal walls – one each at the east and west end of the dome. These walls will be 23 metres long and 2 metres high and will be covered with thick padding (the internal wall at the western end of the dome will also seek to reduce the noise from the dome motor);
(ii) the installation of two canvass partitions to split the dome into thirds. These partitions will be 2.5 metres high and 23 metres long.
18. I consider that the proposed internal partitions and wall as described above and shown at Annex 2 would help to break up and deaden the noise generated from sports activities within the dome. I consider that should the application for the dome to remain onsite for 12 months of year be granted conditions should be attached that (a) require the school to submit a final scheme for the installation of these partitions and walls within one month of the date of any such permission and (b) these should be installed within a further month of any approval for the partitions/walls being given.
(ii) Continued noise from the dome’s compressor
19. A number of local residents have expressed concern about the noise that is generated from the dome’s compressor (which keeps it continually inflated). Although work to install sound proofing fencing around the compressor has previously been carried out this has not solved the problem for some residents. The school has taken professional advice from sound engineers who have concluded that the noise generated by the motor is a mix of high and low frequency sound waves. The high frequency waves can be reduced by improved fencing and insulation. The low frequency waves penetrate further, are harder to absorb and create the ‘droning’ sound which is audible in the evening when background noise falls. The advice of the consultants to address this is to mount the motors more effectively on matt padding insulation (similar to that used in recording studios) and to make the compressors casing more secure. This method has been used for similar developments in other parts of the country.
20. At the time of writing this report the school have informed me that these works will be carried out before 18 May 2009. However, should these works be delayed for whatever reason it is my recommendation that should planning permission be granted a condition is attached requiring the installation of these sound proofing measures to be carried out within one month of the date of any such permission. An update on this will be given at the meeting.
(iii) Visual impact of the dome being retained on site all year round
21. Although the dome is an unorthodox structure and noticeable from the surrounding area it is a temporary structure that only has consent until April 2012. Measures have been undertaken to reduce the visual impact of the dome. New conifer planting has been carried out around the north, south and western sides of the dome which should soften the visual impact of the dome as and when this planting becomes more established. There is also a significant hedge along the eastern boundary of the site that remains between the dome and the residential properties in Warmans Close.
22. There is concern about the visual impact of the dome remaining on site for 12 months of the year. However, the greater visual impact of the dome is during the winter months when there is less foliage on trees. Additional planting has been carried out consistent with OSP policies G2 and VWHLP policies DC1 and DC9 which seek to reduce the visual impact of development. I do not therefore consider that the visual impact of the dome would be unacceptable if it were to remain on site during the summer months.
23. Comments have also been made in relation to the dome remaining on site beyond the period of the current planning permission and that a permanent building should be provided. The school are undertaking a Site Development Review for the redevelopment of the King Alfred’s West Site in order to provide improved accommodation. This site review includes options for the provision of a new permanent sports hall. This planning application should be considered on its merits. The principle of a temporary dome being erected on the site (during part of the year) until April 2012 has already been permitted. This application does not seek to extend the life of the dome beyond April 2012.
Conclusion
24. The liaison meetings with local residents have proved useful in establishing concerns about use of the dome. I consider that the proposal to remove Condition 3 of the current planning permission V.04/08 is acceptable provided that conditions are imposed to implement measures identified by the school to reduce the amount of noise from within the dome and from its compressor.
25. Some residents have expressed concerns about visitor parking. The school are not proposing to use the dome outside the hours and times of use currently permitted and there should, therefore, be no increase in parking as a result of increased use of the dome.
26. Provided that these conditions are continued to be adhered to I believe that it is acceptable to allow the dome to remain erected on site throughout 12 months of the year. The dome is a temporary structure that is due to be removed from the site in April 2012. The visual impact throughout the year will be for a temporary period only. The planting and screening around the dome will become more established and as a result the visual impact of the dome will reduce.
RECOMMENDATION
27. The Committee is RECOMMENDED to approve Application Number R3.009809 for the continuation of the development permitted under permission V.04/08 granted consent on 24/11/2008 (erection of a translucent polythene dome for use part of the year over existing tennis courts for a temporary period of five years) without complying with condition 3 (which requires that the dome should not be installed before the end of term 1 in any school year and must be removed by the end of term 5 in that year) to allow the retention of the dome on site all year round subject to conditions to be determined by the Head of Sustainable Development to include the following matters:
1. Detailed compliance – that the development must be carried out strictly in accordance with the particulars contained in the application and the plans accompanying.
2. On or before 30 April 2012 the dome shall be permanently removed from the site and the tennis courts reinstated to their condition before the approved development took place.
3. The dome shall be used only for school purposes and only between the hours of 8 am to 6 pm Monday to Friday and only during term time (no use during school holidays).
4. Details of any additional lighting over and above that already installed within the dome (10 lighting columns) must be submitted to and agreed by the Head of Sustainable Development before any such lighting is installed.
5. Lighting within the dome shall only be used between the hours of 8 am to 6 pm Monday to Friday and only during term time (no use during school holidays).
6. Within one month of the date of this permission a final scheme for the installation of internal partitions and walls within the dome shall be submitted to and agreed by the Head of Sustainable Development and any such scheme shall be implemented within one month of any permission for the partitions and walls given.
7. Within one month of the date of this permission the proposed sound proofing measures to the dome’s compressor shall be implemented.
8. In the event of noise from the fan unit exceeding 50dba at a point 3 metres from the unit, the school shall submit and implement a scheme of appropriate measures to reduce noise to a level to be first agreed by the Head of Sustainable Development.
9. No new flooring shall be installed unless final details of such flooring have been submitted to and agreed by the Head of Sustainable Development.
10. All trees and shrubs on the land should be preserved and properly maintained and that in the event of any of the trees or shrubs dying or being seriously damaged or destroyed within the period of this permission (until 30 April 2012) a new tree or shrub or equivalent number of trees or shrubs shall be planted and properly maintained.
Informative Liaison Group - The school should continue to hold regular liaison group meetings with local residents in order to discuss and agree any future changes to the use of the dome.
CHRIS COUSINS Head of Sustainable Development Environment & Economy
Background Paper: File Ref: R3.009809 8.4/3887/1
Contact Officer: Alan Divall Tel: Oxford 815886
May 2009 |