Agenda item - BH2018/00248,Patcham High School, Ladies Mile Road, Brighton - Full Planning

Erection of 4no court sports hall with changing facilities. Reconfiguration of existing sports pitches to facilitate creation of new netball courts and a 3G football pitch with fencing and floodlighting, footpath access routes and other associated works.

RECOMMENDATION - Minded to Grant

Ward Affected: Patcham

              Erection of 4no court sports hall with changing facilities. Reconfiguration of existing sports pitches to facilitate creation of new netball courts and a 3G football pitch with fencing and floodlighting, footpath access routes and other associated works.

Officer Presentation

(1)          It was noted that this application had formed the subject of a site visit prior to the meeting.

(2)          The Principal Planning Officer, Gareth Giles, introduced the application and gave a presentation by reference to plans, elevational drawings and photographs. It was explained that the main considerations in determining this application related to the principle of the scheme, visual impact, impact on neighbouring amenity, highways matters, sustainability and arboriculture. The provision of a floodlit all weather pitch and the indoor facilities would enhance the physical educational/sports offer from the school for its students and for the wider community, with the potential to generate income for the school during the extended period of austerity measures and create additional employment opportunities. The proposal was therefore supported in principle; it would substantially enhance the quality of the sports facilities and would accord with the general policy approach for open space sports provision as set out in policies CP16 and CP17. It also met with policy requirements in that it would provide improved sporting facilities close to the community and had good pedestrian cycle links.

(3)          Sport England were of the view that the proposals were of sufficient benefit to the community to outweigh the loss of playing field and therefore supported the proposals. A Community Use Agreement could be secured by s106 agreement to ensure the development would directly benefit the local community and this was considered to represent a significant merit to this application; minded to grant approval was therefore recommended.

            Public Speakers

(4)          Councillor Geoffrey Theobald spoke in his capacity as Local Ward Councillors in support of the scheme which was fully supported by all three Ward Councillors for Patcham Ward. He stated that having been a governor at the school for 20 years he was very aware of the detrimental impact the lack of sports facilities at the school had had. The sports facilities would also be available for use by the community outside of school time. Through the s106 agreement the school would be providing improvements to the local area including a long requested crossing to aid parents taking their children to Patcham Infants School.

            Questions for Officers

(5)       In response to Councillor Hyde, the Planning Officer stated that the closest house to the proposed pitch was 27m away and that in combination with conditions limiting the brightness of the floodlights this was considered acceptable.

(6)       Councillor Mac Cafferty noted the large number of objections from neighbours that had been submitted and asked officers if the condition limiting the opening hours could be strengthened so that a 9pm closing time was secured for a number of years.

(7)       The Legal Adviser responded that they could not prevent the applicant applying to vary a condition in the future.

(8)       Councillor Mac Cafferty welcomed the acoustic fencing mentioned in the report but suggested that further conditions would need to be considered around basketball backboards to limit the amount of noise generated which had been an issue with similar schemes.

(9)       The Planning Manager responded that additional conditions could be added around the extent of the acoustic fencing and the backboards used.

(10)     In response to Councillor Morgan, the Planning Manager stated that the materials used in the 3G pitch and the concerns about their long-term effects would be something that other areas would have to take up and was not a Planning consideration.

(11)     In response to Councillor Littman, the Planning Officer stated that whilst the Council always sought the highest BREEAM standards this had to be balanced against a scheme being affordable and deliverable. As the application provided substantial public benefit Officers accepted the Applicant’s commitment to a rating of ‘very good’ which was in line with Sport England standards for an affordable sports centre.    

            Debate and Decision Making Process

(12)     Councillor Hyde stated that she supported the scheme as it made best use of the field for the pupils and community and would allow the school to generate an income. She did have some concerns about the light and noise but felt a 9pm closing time struck the right balance between commercial viability and residents’ needs.

(13)     Councillor Littman stated that he had found the site visit very beneficial and that he supported what he felt was overall a positive proposal despite some concerns about the sustainability and materials.

(14)     Councillor Mac Cafferty stated that he supported the application but felt from previous experience with similar schemes that the environmental health concerns needed to be thoroughly investigated.

(15)     Councillor Gilbey stated that she was in favour of granting permission and that there were two flood lit playing fields in her ward and that they had not proved to be an issue for residents.

(16)     The Chair stated that she supported the application which would allow for the school field to be better utilised especially in the winter when it was prone to being water logged.

(17)     A vote was taken and on a vote of 11 For with no Against and no abstentions minded to grant planning approval was agreed.

18.4    RESOLVED - That the Committee has taken into consideration and agrees with the reasons for the recommendation set out in the report and resolves to be Minded to Grant planning permission subject to a s106 Planning Obligation and the Conditions and Informatives as set out in the report and the two additional conditions detailed in paragraph 10 above SAVE THAT should the s106 Planning Obligation not be completed on or before the 7 November 2018 the Head of Planning is authorised to refuse planning permission for the reasons set out in section 10. of the report:

Note: Having declared an interest in respect of the above application Councillor C Theobald withdrew from the meeting during consideration of the above application and took no part in the debate or decision making process.

MINOR APPLICATIONS