Return to Agenda
Contact Officer: Alan
Divall, Tel (01865) 815886
ITEM PN7
PLANNING & REGULATION COMMITTEE – 20 JULY 2009
DEMOLITION OF EXISTING CANOPY AND ENTRANCE/STORE
BUILDING AND CREATION OF SINGLE STOREY BUILDING (WITH COVERED WALKWAY) TO
PROVIDE RECEPTION, ADMINISTRATION AND OTHER ASSOCIATED ACCOMMODATION; CREATION
OF EXTENSION TO EXISTING HARD PLAY AREA TO PROVIDE FLOOD COMPENSATION AREA AND
IMPROVEMENTS TO EXISTING WATERCOURSE AND CULVERTS; CREATION OF DEDICATED
DISABLED PARKING SPACE AND OTHER ASSOCIATED WORKS AT CROPREDY CE
PRIMARY SCHOOL, STATION ROAD, CROPREDY, OXFORDSHIRE, OX17 1PU
Application No: R3.0089/09
District Council Area: Cherwell
Introduction
1. This application is for
the erection of a new link building to provide reception, administration and
other associated accommodation at Cropredy CE Primary School. To allow the
erection of the link building an existing entrance/store building and a canopy
would be demolished. The application also involves the creation of an extended
flood compensation area, improvements to an existing water channel, brook,
culvert and other associated works.
Location (see site plan) (download as .doc file)
2. The village of Cropredy is located some 4.6 miles (7.4 kilometres) to the north of Banbury and
close to the Oxfordshire/Northamptonshire border. The school is located off Station Road which is the main road through the village from the south west.
Site and Setting (see site plan)
3. The existing school
site is located on the corner of Station Road and School Lane on the southern
edge of the village. The site at present comprises two main permanent
buildings set back from the frontage of Station Road which are linked by a
covered walkway. The original school buildings on the site are Victorian
although not listed. The school has been developed in piecemeal fashion with
each extension being built to a different height or roof pitch. The buildings
are constructed in predominately red brick. The original Victorian School House
(now privately owned) adjoins the southern most of the two main permanent
buildings on the site. There is also an early learning centre building located
on the site to the east of the main school buildings.
4. The nearest residential
properties (other than School House) are located immediately to the north of
the site, there is also a farm to the south beyond School Lane. Great Bourton
Brook runs along the northern boundary of the site and which is fed by a
drainage channel which runs parallel to Station Road. To the west and south
west of the site beyond School Lane and Station Road are open fields.
5. The main vehicular and
pedestrian access is off Station Road. There is a limited parking area at the
front of the main school buildings. Some ad hoc parking also takes place along School Lane.
Background and Details of the Development
6. A planning application
for a development similar to this application was submitted to the County
Council in March 2008. However, due to an objection from the Environment
Agency the application was withdrawn whilst work to address their concerns was
carried out. Details of this are set out in paragraphs 10 and 11.
7. The aim of the proposal
is to create improvements to the existing accommodation at the school and not
to increase pupil numbers. The development involves the creation of a new link
building between the schools two existing main buildings, which would include
reception, administration office, staff and meeting space accommodation. The
building would also have a covered walkway linking the new building with the
existing buildings. In order to construct the building an existing canopy and
entrance/store building will be demolished.
8. The new link building
is designed to provide staff with improved accommodation but also provide a
focal point for the school entrance. This in turn would allow for increased
security at the main entrance and also improve disabled access which, at
present, is limited. In addition the application proposes a new dedicated
disabled parking space and rearrangement of the existing parking provision at
the front of the school site; no additional spaces are to be created in this
area.
9. The new building has
been designed to reflect the scale of the existing school buildings. It would
have a flat planted sedum roof at a similar level to the north block
immediately adjacent to it. The walls of the proposed building would be
constructed of timber cladding on masonry with a light coloured render.
10. As highlighted in
paragraph 6 the Environment Agency (EA) objected to an application previously
submitted in 2008 on the grounds that the development would increase flood
risk. The application was subsequently withdrawn whilst the applicant carried
out a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) and worked with the EA to satisfy their
original concerns. Once the FRA was completed the application was resubmitted
for consideration. The full FRA accompanying this application is available in
the Members’ Resource Centre.
11. In order to satisfy the
requirements of the EA a number of measures have been proposed in this application.
These include:
· improvements to the
culvert at the front of the school;
· widening of the channel
and brook profile at the corner of an existing school building and along the
northern boundary of the site;
· extension of the
existing hard play area to increase flood compensation areas;
· provision of a 4 metre
gap in the link building to allow flood flow (80% permeable open bar metal
gates will be provided across this gap);
· a sedum grass roof to
aid reduction in direct run-off.
Consultations
12. The consultation period
on this application ran from 23 March to 15 April 2009. An amendment to the
application was consulted on between 28 April and 18 May 2009.
Cherwell District Council – Planning
Development Control
· Original consultation
response – Object. The proposed channel and flood alleviation measures are
considered to be unachievable and insufficient. The proposal would also result
in the loss of overland flood routes which would result in increased flood risk
to neighbouring properties.
· Response to proposed
amendment – Still have concerns relating to the practicality of constructing
the channel improvements adjacent to the corner of the school building. If the
works do proceed recommend that strengthening works are undertaken on the
northern bank to prevent future erosion and also on the southern bank near the
corner of the school buildings. The Great Bourton Brook is a main river
watercourse and therefore under the control of the Environment Agency, their
comments will take precedence over the District Council.
Cherwell District Council – Building
Control and Engineering Services
· Original consultation
response – Concerned about the principal of permitting development in the
undefended functional floodplain but reluctantly accept the Environment
Agency’s position on this. Comments are therefore focused on the details of
the proposed risk mitigation measures to which they have strong concerns, these
include:
(a) not convinced that the
channel improvement works are achievable;
(b) the works will entail felling
mature trees, the clearance of other trees and shrubs and the reduction in the
size of an off stream pond;
(c) the proposed channel
does not go far enough down stream and should continue across an ‘S-bend’
downstream;
(d) the passage of flood
water between the new and existing buildings will be compromised by the
reduction in the size of the gap;
(e) flood resilience
measures will need to be incorporated into the building;
(f) a large tree in the
flood compensation area is proposed to remain, unclear how this can be
achieved.
· Response to proposed
amendment – Still have concerns regarding the practicality of constructing the
channel improvements adjacent to the corner of the school building. If the
works do proceed as proposed would recommend that strengthening works are
undertaken on the northern bank to prevent its future erosion and also on the
southern bank near the corner of the school building.
Cropredy Parish Council
· Original consultation
response – Object. Appreciate that there is a need for improved accommodation
at the school but the development will lead to flooding of neighbouring
properties. Flooding has occurred historically at the site and in recent
years. Also consider that the provision made for parking of staff cars and
dropping off children is inadequate and will increase problems on Station Road.
· Response to proposed
amendment – Object due to impact of the development on neighbouring properties
and the increase in flood risk. The proposal will also involve the loss of
trees which will result in subsidence. Continue to have concerns relating to
the lack of parking provision.
Environment Agency
· Original consultation
response – Object. The application as shown would increase flood risk. The
proposed site plan submitted with the application is not in accordance with the
recommendations of the accompanying Flood Risk Assessment (FRA). The proposed
site plan demonstrates the proposed widening of the channel of Great Bourton
Brook main river but does not show widening of the channel at the ‘pinch point’
at the corner of the school buildings and therefore not in accordance with the
FRA.
· Response to proposed
amendment – Withdraw objection based on the amendments to the proposed site
plans. The proposed mitigation measures submitted by the school as part of
this development are sufficient to ensure that the proposals will not lead to
an increase in flood risk. The proposed development will only be acceptable
subject to recommended conditions being submitted and approved by the Local
Planning Authority in consultation with the Environment Agency.
County Forester
· Original consultation
response – A tree survey or proposals for tree protection measures has not been
provided with the application. The proposed building will have no direct
impact on the trees. However, other associated works and the works to improve
Great Bourton Brook will cause unacceptable damage to the roots of possibly
eleven trees. No evidence has been provided to show how these trees will be
protected or how work within their Tree Root Protection Zones (TRPZs) may be
carried out.
· Response to proposed
amendment – No change to original comments. However, on receipt of the tree
survey carried out at the site the County Forester comments that four trees
(and a number of small coppice trees) would need to be removed to facilitate
the proposal. The loss of one of these trees will impact on the amenity of the
site and should it be removed a replacement should be sought. The applicant
has submitted a workable plan for tree protection should the works proceed.
Transport Development Control – No
objection. The application states that there will be one new parking space
(designated as a disabled space) which is acceptable. The development will not
lead to an increase in the number of pupils or employees and the proposed works
are unlikely to have any highway safety implications and the school have an
up-to-date Travel Plan.
County Ecologist – Is happy
with the ecology statement and mitigation strategy subject to conditions. No
objection provided that a condition is attached to any permission granted
stating that the mitigation strategy and updated surveys are carried out.
Trees to be removed should be checked for their bat roost potential prior to
removal and may need to be ‘soft felled’.
Sport England – No objection as the
development does not affect land capable of forming a playing pitch or result
in the loss of an existing pitch.
Oxfordshire Playing Fields Association – No
objection.
Third Party Representations (copies of these letters are available in the Member’s Resource Centre)
Original consultation responses
13. 4 members of the public
and 1 District Councillor have objected or expressed concern. The issues they
raise relate to the following:
· the application does
not show sufficient improvements to the ‘pinch point’ between the school
buildings and Great Bourton Brook;
· the improvements to the
channels will not provide sufficient capacity to deal with flood water;
· the development will
narrow the flood route between the schools two main buildings (from 7m to 4m)
and that the gates proposed in this gap will increase the possibility of flood
risk. It is also not necessary to provide two sets of gates in this gap;
· the works to the
channels will not be possible and could lead to subsidence of the bank from the
neighbours side and strengthening works should be included in the development;
· the sedum roof and the
proposed soakaways will be insufficient;
· a culvert under School Lane is insufficient to deal with flood flows;
· the development should
not proceed without Environment Agency approval;
· more trees will need to
be removed than indicated in the application, works to remove these trees could
lead to increased subsidence;
· the loss of access to
the schools playground (used for parking in the evening and at weekends) and
spaces at the front of the site will increase parking elsewhere, particularly
along Station Road;
· the revised parking
arrangements at the front of the site should not impact on the private access
to School House;
· no new provision has
been made for new parents drop off areas and a new car park should be provided
for the school;
· the new extension would
impact on the privacy and the loss of daylight of the residents of school
house;
· disruption to the
residents of school house as a result of the proposed works.
Responses to proposed amendment
14. Four letters from
members of the public and one letter from a District Councillor have been
received objecting or expressing concern to the revised site plan showing
amendments to the proposed channel works. The issues they raise relate to the
following:
· no information has been
provided regarding the potential subsidence of the banks opposite the
neighbouring property as a result of the works to the brook and removing the
trees. Conditions should be attached to ensure that no damage occurs to the
bank;
· an increase in flooding
will still occur regardless of the proposed amendment;
· continued concerns
relating to the reduction in the gap between the school buildings which is a
flood flow route. Concerned that the gates between this gap will not be able
to be opened during flash flooding and they should not become permanent doors
in the future. The gates should be across the entire gap rather than the
fencing and gates as proposed. Also concerned as to why there are two sets of
gates;
· continued concerns that
the channel improvement works will be unachievable;
· concerns over the
culvert running under school lane;
· consideration has not
been given to the affect on all the trees on the site including these on
neighbouring properties;
· concerns over traffic
congestion on school lane and a lack of parking for staff and visitors;
· the proposed parking
arrangements are detrimental for vehicle and pedestrian access to school house.
Relevant Planning Policies
15. Regional Spatial
Strategy for the South East of England 2026 (RSS)
CC6 – The development and use of land will
actively promote the creation of sustainable and distinctive communities. This
will be achieved by respecting and enhancing the character and distinctiveness
of settlements and landscapes throughout the region and using innovative design
processes to create a high quality built environment which promotes a sense of
place. This will include the need for environmentally sensitive development.
NRM4 – The sequential approach to
development in flood risk areas set out in PPS25 will be followed.
Inappropriate development should not be allocated in flood zones 2 and 3, areas
at risk of surface water flooding (critical drainage areas) or areas with a
history of groundwater flooding, or where it would increase flood risk
elsewhere, unless there is over-riding need and absence of suitable
alternatives.
NRM5 – Local planning authorities and other
bodies shall avoid a net loss of biodiversity, and actively pursue
opportunities to achieve a net gain across the region.
16. Cherwell Local Plan
1996 (CLP)
C28 – Control will be exercised over all
new development to ensure that the standards of layout, design and external
appearance, including the choice of external finish/materials are sympathetic
to the character of the urban or rural context of the development.
C31 – In existing residential areas any
development which is not compatible with the residential character of the area,
or would cause an unacceptable level of nuisance or visual intrusion will not
normally be permitted.
17. The Non-Statutory
Cherwell Local Plan 2011 (NSCLP)
EN1 - Development which would have an
unacceptable environmental impact (on the natural and built environment) will
not be permitted.
EN14 – In areas at risk from flooding, new
development or the intensification of development will not be permitted if the
proposals would (i) result in the loss of flood plain storage, (ii) impede the
flow of flood water or (iii) increase the risk of flooding elsewhere.
EN15 – New development generating increased
surface water run off will not be permitted unless the proposals include
appropriate source control and/or attenuation measures.
EN23 – Before determining an application
which may affect a known or potential site of nature conservation value,
applicants will be required to submit an ecological survey.
EN35 – Should seek to retain trees and
other features which are important to the character or appearance of the local
landscape as a result of their ecological or amenity value. Proposals which
would result in the loss of such features will not be permitted unless they can
be justified by appropriate mitigation or compensatory measures.
D6 – Design control will be exercised to
ensure that any proposal for an extension of an existing building provides
acceptable standards of amenity and privacy.
TR4 – Before proposals for development are
permitted the Council will need to be satisfied that all appropriate transport
mitigation measures required to support that development are identified.
Comments of the Head of Sustainable
Development
18. In my view the main
issues to be considered with this application relate to the impact on
neighbouring residents and the wider environment as a result of:
(i) increased flood risk;
(ii) impact on trees;
(iii) loss of amenity to
School House;
(iv) concerns over traffic
and parking.
(i) Increased
flood risk
19. Objections have been
received to the application on the grounds that the proposed link building
would increase the risk of flooding to neighbouring residential properties.
The objectors have set out the historical context against which flooding has
occurred at the site and how they believe a reduction in the gap between the
two existing sets of school buildings will increase flood flow to other parts
of the site and consequently to neighbouring properties. Part of the school
site, the School House and surrounding areas were flooded during July 2007 and
previous occasions. Detailed points relating to increased flood risk have also
been raised.
20. As identified in
paragraphs 10 and 11, this application proposes a number of flood alleviation
measures to reduce the risk of flooding which could arise as a result of the
new link building. The Environment Agency (EA) objected to the original
consultation on this application because the proposed drawings submitted with
the application were not consistent with the Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) also
submitted. This was specifically in relation to insufficient widening of part
of the brook at the corner of the school buildings on the northern boundary of
the site. As a result of this objection the applicant revised the works shown
to the brook on the submitted drawings. Submission of these revised drawings
has led to the EA withdrawing their objection subject to the works being
carried out strictly in accordance with the FRA and other detailed conditions.
21. Despite the withdrawal
of the objection from the EA a number of concerns relating to the practicality
of the proposed flood alleviation works remain. As a result the EA called a
site meeting with neighbours, the school, the project architect and the Parish
Council. This meeting took place on 3 June 2009. One of the outcomes of this
meeting was that the applicant produced a more detailed site survey of the
proposed channel and brook improvements in order to ensure there were no
inconsistencies at this stage (detailed site surveys are usually carried out at
the detailed design stage of new developments). The detailed site survey has not
however altered the principal of the flood alleviation works and therefore the
view of the EA has not changed.
22. A number of detailed
points relating to increased flood risk have also been received. Some local
residents have raised concern that the two sets of proposed gates between the
new and existing buildings will obstruct flood flow and gather debris during
times of flood. The EA is however satisfied with the principle of these gates
being located in these positions and does not object to their design (open bar
metal gates with fixed one metre sections at each end). To ensure that the
design and location of these gates is not altered in future (under permitted
development rights) a condition can be attached requiring the gates to remain
as currently shown for the life of the development.
23. Some local residents
have also said that the gates should remain open during out of school hours so
that they cannot impede flood flow should a flood occur during this time. The
gates have been positioned and designed specifically to provide security for
the school buildings out of school hours, therefore it is not in the interests
of the school to leave them open. Discussions have taken place between the
school and local residents as to the possibility of a protocol for keyholder
access to these gates by local residents. I therefore consider that this
protocol should be encouraged by the school in order to allay the concerns the
residents have in relation to this. This protocol can be encouraged by way of
an informative attached to any permission given.
24. Concerns have been
raised by a neighbouring resident that the works to widen the brook would lead
to damage to the bank between their property and the brook. The applicant has
confirmed that no works will take place to the bank to the north of the brook.
All of the widening works will be carried out to the south on the school side.
This is shown with the plans submitted with the application and the details in
the FRA. The local resident has also raised concern that the works to the
brook will lead to subsidence of the northern bank. Building Control at
Cherwell District Council have also commented that strengthening works should
be carried out to the northern bank in order to ensure that subsidence does not
occur. The applicant has confirmed that their investigations have shown that
no work to strengthen the bank is required. However, no evidence to suggest
this has been submitted. To ensure that the bank to the northern side of the
brook does not require strengthening work I consider it necessary for the
applicant to provide details and evidence of the investigations into the
stability of the northern bank of the brook. Should these investigations show
the need for strengthening works a detailed scheme for their implementation
would need to be submitted and approved in consultation with the Environment
Agency.
25. In conclusion on this
issue I consider that the development is acceptable in flooding terms and
accords with Planning Policy Statement 25 (Development and Flood Risk), RSS
policy NRM4 and NSCLP policies EN14 and EN15 provided that the conditions
recommended by the EA and others detailed in the recommendation are strictly
adhered to. The EA consider that the development is acceptable subject to conditions
which they will need to confirm they are satisfied with before the development
can proceed. Should the school be unable to satisfy the requirements of these
conditions the development could not be implemented.
(ii) Impact on
trees
26. The proposed flood
alleviation works would have an impact on a number of trees on the site. The County Forester commented that the works would affect more trees than shown in the
application and that the applicant should provide a full detailed tree survey.
As a result of the carrying out of the tree survey and further comments from
the County Forester it has been identified that four trees and a group of small
coppice trees will need to be removed to facilitate the flood alleviation
measures. Only these trees will be lost provided that the tree protection
measures identified in the tree survey are fully implemented during the
construction works.
27. Of the four trees to be
removed the most significant is considered to be a large maple tree
approximately 15 metres in height. This tree is located in the area of the
proposed extension to the schools hard play area in order to provide an
increased flood storage area. It had been envisaged in the application that
this tree could be retained if appropriate tree protection measures were put in
place. However, it has been agreed by the County Forester that it would be
appropriate to remove this tree as its retention would render it unsafe.
Although this tree has amenity value within the site I consider that the need
for the increased flood compensation area (as approved by the EA) outweighs the
loss of this tree provided that suitable replacement tree planting is provided
on the site in accordance with NSCLP Policy EN35. This replacement tree
planting can be provided through a landscaping scheme submitted through
appropriate conditions and agreed in consultation with the County Forester. Conditions should also be attached requiring a sound and robust tree
protection plan to be submitted and agreed in accordance with the recommendations
of the tree survey and the advice of the County Forester. To also ensure that
no further trees to those currently identified as being lost are removed a
condition can be attached requiring consent should any further trees need to be
removed.
(iii) Loss of amenity to School
House
28. School House is a
private residency adjoining the existing school buildings at the front of the
site. Concerns have been raised by the occupants of School House that the
proposed link building would impact on the amenity of their property,
specifically in relation to loss of privacy and vehicle and pedestrian access.
They have stated that the location of the school’s disabled parking space would
restrict vehicular access from their garage and parking area. Transport Development
Control have however confirmed that there is sufficient space to achieve the
required manoeuvring between the spaces and its location is acceptable.
29. The resident of School
House has also expressed concern that the location of the new link building
opposite their kitchen window would impact on privacy. The building line of
the new link building (including its overhanging roof line) will be
approximately 0.7 metres closer to the kitchen window elevation of the School
House; this would reduce the distance between the two elevations to
approximately 3.5 metres. Currently the school elevation that faces the School
House is partly glazed with no restrictions in views between the two buildings;
the new elevation would include two new smaller windows. Although I consider
that the change in views between the two buildings would be minimal as a result
of the development I consider that a condition should be attached requiring the
two new windows that face the kitchen elevation of School House to be glazed
with obscure glass. The residents have also expressed concern that the
proposed parking space located between these two elevations would restrict
pedestrian access from the rear door of School House. The applicant has
confirmed that this private access will not be obstructed as a result of the
parking space; to ensure that this occurs a condition can be attached requiring
this access to be kept clear at all times for the resident of School House.
(iv) Concerns over traffic and
parking
30. Concern has been raised
from neighbouring residents regarding traffic and congestion on Station Road as a result of school activities. In particular comments relate to the loss of
staff and visitor parking at the front of the site. This proposal seeks to
formalise the parking at the front of the site and provide a dedicated disabled
space.
31. The applicant has
confirmed that there will be no loss of parking provision (5 spaces) at
the front of the site for both staff and visitors. The proposal is not
intended to provide for an increase in staff or pupil numbers so there will be
no increase in traffic or movements to the school as a result of this
development. Transport Development Control have raised no objection to the
application and have noted that the application would lead to a safer
separation of pedestrian and vehicular access. The applicant has also
confirmed that discussions have taken place and will continue with the Parish
Council and other parties in order to provide increased parking and improved
drop off areas for the school. Any proposal for this would be the subject of a
separate planning application.
32. Currently the school
use the existing hard play area for out of school hours meetings and events.
Access to this is currently provided through the front of the site (off Station Road) and between the existing school buildings. Some objectors have commented that
by reducing the gap between the existing buildings and gating the gap, the use
of this area for out of hours parking would be restricted; this will lead to an
increase in parking on Station Road. The applicant has confirmed that the
parking on the school hard play area would still be available out of hours and
will be accessed by the existing maintenance vehicle entrance off School Lane.
Conclusion
33. Although concerns have
been raised about increased flood risk as a result of this proposal I consider
that the proposed development is acceptable in planning terms provided that
conditions recommended are strictly adhered to. Importantly the Environment
Agency is satisfied with the proposal provided that conditions can be
discharged to their satisfaction, if this cannot be achieved the development
cannot be implemented.
RECOMMENDATION
34. The Committee is
RECOMMENDED to approve Application Number R3.0089/09 for the demolition of
existing canopy and entrance/store building and creation of single storey
building (with covered walkway) to provide reception, administration and other
associated accommodation; creation of extension to existing hard play area to
provide flood compensation area and improvements to existing watercourse and
culverts; creation of dedicated disabled parking space and other associated
works at Cropredy Primary School, subject to conditions to be determined by the
Head of Sustainable Development to include the following matters:
1. Detailed
compliance (amended plans) – that the development must be carried out strictly
in accordance with the particulars contained in the application and the plans
accompanying subject to conditions below.
2. Detailed
duration – 3 years – that the development shall commence within 3 years of the
date of the permission.
3. That the
development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved Flood
Risk Assessment dated December 2008 (and associated addendum letters and
drawings).
4. That the
development shall not commence until a scheme to improve the channel capacity
of Great Bourton Brook and the unnamed tributary watercourse as outlined in the
Flood Risk Assessment dated December 2008 (and associated addendum letters and
drawings) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Head of
Sustainable Development in consultation with the Environment Agency. The scheme
shall be fully implemented and subsequently maintained, in accordance with the
timing / phasing arrangements embodied within the scheme.
5. On completion of
the floodplain compensation works a topographic survey of the completed works
which demonstrates that adequate floodplain compensation has been provided in
accordance with the recommendations of the Flood Risk Assessment shall be
submitted to and approved in writing by the Head of Sustainable Development in
consultation with the Environment Agency.
6. Prior to
the widening of the ditch, a scheme for the provision and
management of compensatory habitat shall be submitted to and approved in
writing by the Head of Sustainable Development in consultation with the
Environment Agency.
7. Prior to
commencement of the development further investigations shall be carried out to
assess the stability of the northern bank of Great Bourton Brook. If
strengthening works are considered necessary then a detailed scheme for their
implementation shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Head of
Sustainable Development in consultation with the Environment Agency. The timing
of the strengthening works shall be carried out in accordance with the
requirements of the approved floodplain compensation works. Should strengthening
works not be required no works shall be carried out to the northern bank of
Great Bourton Brook.
8. Vegetation from
the southern bank top and bank should be cleared by hand. The digger
should scrape small amounts of the bank earth off at a time, taking care not to
drop earth spoil into the brook. The digger should not enter the brook.
9. That the design
and location of the proposed gates between the existing and proposed buildings
should remain as shown in the approved application and for the lifetime of the
proposed development. Any changes to the design and location of the gates shall
be submitted to and approved in writing by the Head of Sustainable Development
in consultation with the Environment Agency.
10. That no
development shall take place until the final details of flood resilient
construction techniques to be incorporated within the new building have been
submitted in writing to the Head of Sustainable Development.
11. That no
development shall take place until the trees on the site which are to be
retained and which are adjacent to or within the development area, have been
protected during building operations by means of a protective fence around the
edge of the canopy of the trees in accordance with the Bartlett Consulting Tree
Survey (May 2009) and the advice of the County Forester.
12. With the
exception of those identified as needing to be removed in the Bartlett
Consulting Tree Survey (May 2009), no trees shall be topped, lopped or cut down
and no shrubs or hedges shall be cut down without prior consent of the Head of
Sustainable Development.
13. That the site be
landscaped and planted with replacement trees in accordance with a
comprehensive planting and landscaping scheme to be agreed in writing by the
Head of Sustainable Development and consultation with the County Forester prior
to the commencement of development.
14. That all
planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping
shall be carried out in the first planting season following the occupation of
the buildings or the completion of the development, whichever is the sooner.
15. An updated bat
survey should be carried out 6 weeks before the scheduled
demolition of the buildings.
16. An
ecologist should brief contractors on the location of potential bat
roosts and mitigation measures immediately prior to any demolition.
17. Potential bat
roosts in the roof should be dismantled carefully by hand. Roof lining
should be carefully peeled back. If any bats are found, all work should
cease immediately and an ecologist should be contacted.
18. The school
pond should be decreased in size by rolling back the pond lining and
backfilling the gap created with earth.
19. Vegetation removal should
not take place during the bird breeding season, which is March-August
inclusive. If any trees and/or bushes need to be removed during this time, they
will need to be checked over by an ecological consultant immediately prior to
removal to ensure there are no nesting birds present. If nesting birds are
present, the vegetation cannot be removed until the birds have fledged.
20. That the hours
of access (including for deliveries) for construction traffic shall be agreed
in writing by the Head of Sustainable Development and in consultation with the
school before the start of works on the site.
21. The location and
fencing off of any contractor compound to be submitted and agreed in writing by
the Head of Sustainable Development prior to the commencement of development.
22. That samples of
the external materials proposed to be used shall be submitted to and approved
in writing by the Head of Sustainable Development prior to the commencement of
development.
23. That the two
windows in the elevation of the proposed link building overlooking the kitchen
windows of the privately owned School House shall be frosted or glazed with
obscure glass.
24. That the
pedestrian access from the rear door of the privately owned School House shall
be kept clear at all times.
Informatives:
Environment
Agency - Under the terms of the Water Resources Act 1991, and the Land Drainage
Byelaws 1981, the prior written consent of the Environment Agency is required
for any proposed works or structures, in, under, over or within 8 metres of the
top of the bank of the Great Bourton Brook main river. Erection of flow control
structures or any culverting of a watercourse requires the prior written
approval of the Environment Agency under s.23 of the Land Drainage Act 1991 or
s.109 of the Water Resources Act 1991.
Out
of school hours access to security gates - The school should seek to develop a
key holder access protocol with its immediate neighbours to allow the opening
of the proposed security gates during times of flooding.
CHRIS COUSINS
Head of Sustainable Development
Environment & Economy
Background Papers: File Ref: R3.0089/09
& 8.1/4646/4 held in Environment & Economy, Speedwell House, Oxford
July 2009
Return
to TOP |