07/00102/OUT CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW WATERWAY ARM TOTALLING 6.5 KM IN LENGTH INCLUDING ROUTING THROUGH WILLEN LAKE, OVER THE RIVER OUZEL, CANALISATION OF BROUGHTON BROOK, WATERWAY TERMINUS AT EAGLE FARM NORTH AND PROVISION OF ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE INCLUDING BRIDGES, LOCKS, WEIRS AND STRUCTURAL LANDSCAPING (OUTLINE) AT Proposed Development At,, Newlands, Fox Milne,, Atterbury, Broughton, FOR British Waterways
INTRODUCTION
The application site lies to the east of Milton Keynes taking in land through Newlands, Fox Milne, Atterbury and Broughton. The 6.5 kilometre site comprises open areas of partly developed grid squares, the canalisation of part of Broughton Brook and partly within the Milton Keynes Eastern Expansion Area. The site is within both Milton Keyes Council and Milton Keynes Partnership Authority areas for the purpose of development control. Two applications have been submitted relating to the relevant areas. The applications will be reported to the respective Development Control Committees at the two authorities.
The outline application is in support of a submission for a £25m lottery bid which was to be submitted at the end of May 2007.
RELEVANT HISTORY AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
In 1995 the local community based Bedford and Milton Keynes Waterway Trust was founded and made a short listed bid for millennium funding. The Trust members engaged British Waterways in further consideration of the Water Park project in 2000/2001. In 2001 a project partnership was formed which funded the first feasibility study. British Waterways and Trust volunteers together spent two years collecting community views through a wide variety of channels including consultations with parish councils and stakeholders on the route, a citizens jury in 2002, and a technical day in 2003. The consultations informed the deliberations over the route and the design of the waterway park. At the early stages route options included a route joining the Grand Union Canal at Fenny Stratford and a route passing to the north rather than south of Willen Lake. More recently (2004) various routes across the Broughton area and the EEA were considered. These alternatives can be characterised as passing through the EEA towards the north, the middle, or south of the residential areas. The route that was incorporated into the Eastern Expansion Area Development Framework in October 2005 was the most southerly option passing along the Broughton Brook. This consultation process has continued informing the detail of the route and locks and bridges.
PROPOSAL
The proposed waterway which is approximately 6.5 kilometres in length will vary in width from 9-15m. The actual depth is 1.5m although its position above or below existing ground level varies through the route. The waterway will branch off the Grand Union Canal by Campbell Park in Newlands and head east towards the M1.
The waterway will initially run alongside and north of H6 Childs Way down 5 locks through a new culvert before crossing an area of open recreation land to join Willen Lake. A new green bridge is proposed to the edge of the lake to allow people to continue to walk around the lake without realising they were walking over a bridge. The waterway will run through the lake at the same level. A pontoon is currently proposed to separate the waterway from the remainder of the lake. At the eastern end of Willen Lake, the waterway will rise up via a double lock before crossing the River Ouzel on an aqueduct. For approx 100m the waterway will be above the existing ground level on a 2m high embankment.
The waterway will run parallel with Childs Way to the south and commercial buildings to the north where it has a slightly amended route. It will then drop down below Tongwell Street and Childs Way via culverts.
The waterway then enters Atterbury, skirting around the southern and eastern flank of the new Milton Keynes Hindu Association residential developments.
Once leaving Atterbury the waterway will enter the Broughton Brook just north of the new cable stay bridge. The waterway will then run through the Broughton Brook for approximately 3km passing below the cable stay bridge and H7 extension rising through one lock before going below Kingston Bridge. The waterway will run east through Broughton Brook for a further 900m before rising back out of the brook through a lock before crossing a short section of floodplain and terminating at an open area at Eagle Farm North. Along this section the waterway will be fitted into the existing ground profile.
The proposed works through the brook will involve increasing the width of the waterway in places from its existing 3-4m to a total width of 24m. This would include a 15-18m navigable channel with a 5m wide shallow vegetation shelf running along the south west bank.
The application is accompanied by an Environmental Statement which covers topics on water resources, biodiversity, soils geology and contaminated land, landscape and visual, cultural heritage, socio-economic effects, traffic and accessibility, noise, air quality and climate change, interactive and cumulative effects, services and utilities. There is also a Flood Risk Assessment.
MAIN ISSUES
Impact on the landscape
Water resources
Ecology
Socio economic and
Loss of employment and local residents' concerns
POLICY
Adopted Milton Keynes Local Plan 2001-2011
S3 City Expansion Areas S12 Linear Parks S13 Areas Liable to Flooding D1 Impact of Development Proposals on Locality NE1 Nature Conservation Sites NE2 Protected Species NE3 Biodiversity and Geological Enhancement T1 Transport User Hierarchy T2 Access for those with Impaired Mobility T3 Pedestrians and Cyclists T4 Pedestrians and Cyclists T8 Rail and Canal Freight L1 Facilities Acceptable in the Parks System L2 Protection of Public Open Space and Existing Facilities E1 Protection of Existing Employment Land EA1 General Policies for Expansion Areas EA2 General Policies for Expansion Areas EA3 Eastern Expansion Area Site MK1
Government Guidance:-
PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development and General Principles PPS9 Biodiversity and Geological Conservation PPG13 Transport PPG15 Planning and the Historic Environment PPG17 Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation PPS25 Development and Flood Risk
CONSULTATION AND REPRESENTATIONS
The applicants presented an overview of the waterway project on the 20th March 2007 which members of the committees from MKC and MKP attended. The meeting was also available to the public. The evening meeting involved a short presentation and question and answer session. There was no debate on the merits of the proposal.
Development Plans Manager indicates that the waterway is identified on the Local Plan Proposals Map within the Eastern Expansion Area. The rest of the route through the city is not identified because of a lack of route feasibility work at the time of preparing the proposals map. In more detail he comments:-
Newlands Section
The application would conform in principle to the leisure and recreation open space/ Linear Park designation of Newlands. In terms of the transport reservation the Waterway route itself is covered by Policy T13 and a transport reservation from Atterbury right through the Eastern Expansion Area. Therefore it is considered to be a use that would be acceptable in principle in a transport reservation. The main issues would be whether the transport reservation is required for any other transport scheme (advice required from Highways) or whether the use would have a detrimental impact on the Wildlife Corridor.
Willen Lake Section
In principle the application would conform to the leisure and recreation open space/ Linear Park designation of the area. However the council would need to be satisfied that the waterway did not have an adverse or significant impact on the Wildlife Corridor and the floodplain.
Fox Milne Section
The thin linear nature of the proposal and its location along the southern boundary of Fox Milne means that the proposal is unlikely to result in an unacceptable loss of employment land under criterion (iii) of E1. In terms of the transport reservation, the same considerations as for the Newlands section apply.
Atterbury and Broughton Brook Section (to the A5130)
The Local Plan Proposals Map route alignment through Atterbury and at the top end of Broughton Brook does contain some sharp bends. The alignment that is in the application eliminates these bends and illustrates an easier navigation (including a widening of the waterway at the point of aligning with Broughton Brook). As with the Fox Milne section, the majority of the Atterbury site stays intact for employment development. This part of the proposal will result in the loss of more employment land than at Fox Milne as it will isolate a small part of the allocation to the north of the waterway. However this is still likely to be insignificant in terms of Policy E1. The safeguarded route on the Local Plan itself cuts through part of the housing allocation, so this is potentially less significant. However clarification is required that this alignment does not conflict with development already permitted on this site. As with the Willen Lake section, the council needs to be satisfied that there are no significant adverse impacts on the floodplain or the Wildlife Corridor through the Broughton Brook area. The alignment of the waterway across development on the Broughton Gate site is not acceptable and clarification should be sought on why the Local Plan safeguarded route has not been followed at this point.
Natural England originally objected to the application on the basis of a lack of ecological survey information. They advise that surveys and mitigation strategies should not be made a requirement of a planning condition or be undertaken after permission has been granted.
On the 9th May Natural England withdrew their objection following further work from the applicant's agents. They state that they are now satisfied with the information relating to previous survey work and proposed additional survey work for protected species.
The additional survey work is currently being carried out by the applicant's agents and competent ecologists throughout the month of May. Additional comments in relation to this survey work will be reported verbally.
Bucks, Beds, Oxon Wildlife Trust (BBOWT) whilst recognising the potential wildlife benefits that could be gained through the construction of the new waterway also originally objected to the application on the basis of a lack of ecological survey information presented in the ES. To fulfil the requirements and habitats regulations, adequate survey information is required prior to planning permission being granted. They have also indicated that following additional work that they would be more likely to look favourably on the proposal but have confirmed that regarding protected species they will defer to Natural England.
MKC Countryside Officer has raised concerns in relation to the sustainability of the project, protected species being adequately addressed, a tree survey being provided, the flood control strategy being unacceptable, the alignment of the waterway adjacent to the brook being considered and adequate habitats for species be maintained.
Environment Agency (EA) originally recommended that the determination of the application be deferred until the following issues can be resolved:
1. The Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) meets the requirements of PPS25 in terms of sequential testing and the impact on users of the whole length of the proposed waterway as well as third parties. 2. Consideration of potential impact on Willen Lake and the River Ouzel. 3. Hydraulic modelling of Broughton Brook needs to be agreed with the Internal Drainage Board (IDB) and EA.
They also recommend conditions on landfill gas.
The applicant's agents have sought to address these outstanding issues with the production of additional FRA assessment work along parts of the proposed canal not previously covered including Willen Lake. They have also sought to demonstrate compliance with PPS25.
Although the EA have not on writing the report confirmed that all items are now adequately dealt with, it is considered that any outstanding issues can be dealt with satisfactorily by conditions and a verbal update will be provided on the night of committee.
Bucks and River Ouzel Internal Drainage Board at the time of writing still had concerns which needed to be addressed in terms of the FRA, planting, maintenance, flows, and navigation. These concerns are currently being addressed by the applicant's agents and the outcome of these further details if necessary will be reported verbally.
Due to time and financial constraints it is not considered that all outstanding items can be dealt with at this outline stage and that appropriately worded conditions would prevent the scheme from going ahead until all outstanding concerns had been addressed to the satisfaction of the EA and IDB.
The Chairman of the IDB board has written a letter to indicate that The Board is supportive in principle to the proposed MK Waterway Park. He indicates that they are particularly encouraged that modelling based on the outline designs indicates that the project would improve the flood water management potential of Broughton Brook during extreme flooding. He indicates that the waterway park has the potential to make a significant positive contribution to land drainage and flood defence issues within the area. They indicate that they look forward to working with the project as it moves to a detailed phase.
English Nature recommends that the application should be determined in accordance with national and local policy guidance and on the basis of specialist conservation advice.
South East England Regional Assembly (SEERA) has no objections subject to adequate protection and enhancement of biodiversity assets and appropriate mitigation is in place to ensure that there are no significant effects on water quality.
South East England Development Agency (SEEDA) have no objections.
The local independent badger advisor indicates that there is a likelihood of the route impacting on two setts at Newlands and Fox Milne. Badgers from active setts at Pineham, Brook Furlong and Atterbury forage the land between the M1 and the Broughton/Kingston areas.
He advises that a complete badger survey on both sides of the brook is carried out prior to work on site.
The Archaeological Officer has requested a condition to ensure that the site is evaluated before work is commenced.
Landscape and Countryside Manager considers that although there will be a significant visual impact, if designed properly and consideration given to the wider corridor, it would not have a negative impact.
Environmental Health have no objections in terms of noise and air quality as they will be mitigated against during construction. They recommend a condition on contaminated land.
Anglian Water comments are awaited.
Highway comments are awaited.
The Parks Trust comment as follows:
1. The Parks Trust is supportive of making their land available for this purpose. 2. They believe that the waterway will provide benefit to Milton Keynes and enhance biodiversity of the area 3. The support is conditioned upon the requirements of the Internal Drainage Board and Environment Agency being satisfied. 4. The separation of the waterway from Broughton Brook may be preferable to the proposed canalisation, in order to minimise flood risk, safeguard water quality, preserve water supply and allow effective water management. They consider that Broughton Brook Linear Park will be of sufficient width to accommodate the waterway in a separate channel. 5. They would also be happy to consider taking the canal through Willen Lake itself to connect to the brook further north thus alleviating the costly engineering works currently proposed. 6. There should be additional crossings of Broughton Brook. 7. There should be consideration of opening up Willen Lake to boaters. 8. The miniature railway at Willen Lake would be severed by the waterway and a suitable replacement facility will need to be provided. 9. Landscaping needs to be revised in a number of locations so as to facilitate the maintenance of the waterway. 10. The Trust expects to be fully involved in the detail design of waterside landscaping and waterway infrastructure. 11. A further condition for support is that there is adequate provision for the long term management and maintenance of the waterway.
Broughton Villagers group support the application.
Campbell Park PC supports the principle of the proposed development, they are concerned that there will be adequate pedestrian crossings, that safely will be adequately addressed and liaison maintained with the Parish Council during the life of the canal.
Broughton and Milton Keynes PC support the proposal but would like reassurance that the proposal will be opened through to Bedford as the viability of the Milton Keynes section is more questionable.
Two individual letters of objection on grounds that: 1. The application has not been advertised adequately 2. Inadequate information available 3. Financial burden of the project on tax payers
Petition against the canal containing 13 names objecting on the following grounds:
1. Vibration, noise and hazardous earth movement during construction 2. Noise and disturbance after completion from anti social behaviour 3. Loss of privacy 4. Additional earth movement which could impact on house foundations 5. Risk of flooding 6. Impact on wildlife and the natural environment 7. Risk of pollution 8. Inadequate publicity of the application 9. Inadequate certainty and funding
Letter of objection on behalf of the owners of the Eastlake Park B1 Office Campus at Fox Milne Industrial Estate who object to part of their land which is allocated for industrial use being included in the route. In addition they advise that the scheme would result in the loss of flood storage capacity within the linear park which has been agreed with the EA, and would prejudice their development scheme.
CONSIDERATIONS
Impact on the landscape
As the proposal involves earth movement along 6.5km of land to the east side of Milton Keynes, there will therefore be an impact on the physical landscape.
With the proposals in place the study area would be marked by a considerable presence of an engineered watercourse varying in width from 9m to 15m as well as areas of shallow vegetation and a 3m wide multi user access path.
Relevant policies are L1 Leisure and Recreation which clarifies the uses and type of development acceptable within Linear and District Parks and seeks to minimise the environmental impact of development upon existing parks.
L2 which seeks the protection of open space and existing facilities, NE1 which relates to the protection/creation of wildlife corridors and HE6 development affecting the setting of Conservation Areas.
As the waterway leaves the existing Grand Union Canal this section is characterised by highway transport routes, particularly Childs Way a dual carriageway which lies to the south. Childs Way is elevated approx 1.5-2m above the proposed route of the waterway and is substantially screened from it by mature planting. Although some of this landscaping would be removed to make way for the cutting, additional landscaping would be provided. It is not therefore considered that the proposed waterway would be unduly prominent from Childs Way.
Further to the east the landscape type is dominated by Willen Lake, a large recreational area with lake. The proposed waterway would cut through part of the parkland and cross through the lake. The waterway would be prominent in views from the south side of lake by recreation users but viewed in context with the lake and recreational facilities it would fit appropriately into this context. The south side of the lake between the lake and Childs Way is characterised by mature trees.
To the east of Willen Lake is the River Ouzel which separates the lake from the commercial development at Northfield and Fox Milne. There would be clear views of the waterway site from the existing and proposed offices at Fox Milne Employment Area. Again seen in context with existing offices, the River Ouzel and existing and proposed landscaping it is not considered that it would have a detrimental impact on the landscape.
The proposal then passes under Childs Way and enters a more open aspect of landscape which comprises woodland, copse, grassland and wetland areas until it reaches the proposed site for the Hindu Association. From this point the proposed canal begins to be prominent in views from newly constructed and proposed residential properties.
The canal would then enter the Broughton Brook whereby the Brook would be canalised. This will involve the loss of some existing vegetation and a 9-15m wide canal with locks, culverts, tunnels and engineered water course. It will change the meandering nature of the brook. The change of nature of Broughton Brook is particularly significant as it passes through a large track of linear amenity parkland. Although the proposal would create a change in nature it would also enhance the linear park.
The main impact of the development is going to be during construction when there will be excavation, clearance of vegetation, earthworks, temporary disruption of the Broughton Brook, lighting and site huts. This will however be temporary.
The proposed waterway from this point is within MKP area and is mainly characterised by farmland.
Water Resources
Water Supply
There are several water bodies affected by the scheme. These include The Grand Union Canal, Willen Lake, The River Ouzel and Broughton Brook.
The waterway will be fed primarily from the Grand Union Canal at the western end of the waterway. A waterway management study was undertaken for the Bedford to Milton Keynes Canal 2004 which concluded that there appears to be sufficient water from the Grand Union Canal that could supply the proposed waterway. To supplement the water it is also proposed to construct a small reservoir near the terminus of the arm.
From the eastern end flows from Broughton Brook will enter the waterway between locks 11 and 12. This will flow northwards past locks 10 and 11 before exiting the waterway at Atterbury back into Broughton Brook. This is likely to be via a weir. This could have an impact on the flows of Broughton Brook as the flow is being reversed for a time.
There will be two lengths of waterway without a water supply which will require a pumping arrangement. These are between locks 7 and 8 Atterbury and the Marina at Fox Covert to Broughton Brook.
Water Quality
The ES indicates that water quality in the waterway, River Ouzel and in Broughton Brook is fairly good, although there are some water quality problems in the waterway during summer. The mixing of water bodies may have major implications for water quality and there could be an affect on the environment of Atterbury Ponds, a wetland area that supports Great Crested Newts.
Although the ES has raised issues it is considered that details confirming water quantity and quality can be de dealt with satisfactorily.
Flooding
PPS25 indicates that:
LPAs should in determining planning applications: - have regard to the policies in this PPS and, as relevant, in the RSS for their region to - ensure that planning applications are supported by site-specific flood risk assessments (FRAs) as appropriate; - apply the sequential approach at a site level to minimise risk by directing the most vulnerable development to areas of lowest flood risk, matching vulnerability of land use to flood risk; - give priority to the use of SUDS (Sustainable Urban Drainage Sustems); and - ensure that all new development in flood risk areas is appropriately flood resilient and resistant, including safe access and escape routes where required, and that any residual risk can be safely managed
Those proposing development are responsible for: - demonstrating that it is consistent with the policies in this PPS and those on flood risk in the LDD; - providing a FRA demonstrating: - whether any proposed development is likely to be affected by current or future flooding from any source; - satisfying the LPA that the development is safe and where possible reduces flood risk overall; - whether it will increase flood risk elsewhere; and - the measures proposed to deal with these effects and risks. Any necessary flood risk management measures should be sufficiently funded to ensure that the site can be developed and occupied safely throughout its proposed lifetime; - designs which reduce flood risk to the development and elsewhere, by incorporating sustainable drainage systems and where necessary, flood resilience measures and - identifying opportunities to reduce flood risk, enhance biodiversity and amenity, protect the historic environment and seek collective solutions to managing flood risk.
A Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) was submitted with the application which has dealt with the flood risk associated with the proposed canalisation of the Brook. The modelling work in this study showed that the initial design considered in this study for aligning a navigation waterway within the Broughton Brook corridor is technically feasible without increasing flood risk within the corridor, upstream and downstream of the corridor.
Consultation responses from the IDB and Environment Agency originally raised concerns that the FRA should cover the whole length of the proposed waterway, impact on Willen lake and the River Ouzel and planting, maintenance, flows and navigation along Broughton Brook.
The applicants agent have supplied additional technical information to cover flood risk to other areas along the proposed canal, compliance with PPS25 in terms of climate change, further modelling of the Broughton Brook and flows and navigation along Broughton Brook.
The applicants' agents are confident that they can further satisfy the outstanding issues raised by the Environment Agency and IDB but due to financial constraints are not able to undertake any further studies at this time. An update from the applicants' agent will be reported verbally.
The EA has not directly objected to the proposal whereby the LPA would have to ask the Secretary of State to consider whether to call in the application for decision. Equally the IDB although objecting to the proposal have now written a letter of support in principle.
The application is in outline and it is considered that any further outstanding flood risk issues could be subject to satisfactorily worded Grampian style conditions to satisfy the outstanding concerns of the EA and IDB.
The Parks Trust amongst other issues, raised the question as to whether the route of the waterway could be deviated to go along side the Broughton Brook. This has been looked at by the applicants and their agents who have advised that there is not adequate room to accommodate the waterway in a separate channel.
Ecology
The main concern of PPG9 is with the protection of statutorily designated sites for the conservation of wildlife and natural features.
Policy NE1 states at iii that:-
Development which would be likely to harm the biodiversity or geological conservation value of a site of county-wide (RIGS, MK Wildlife sites) or local importance (Local Nature Reserves, Wildlife Corridors, local wildlife sites) will only be permitted if the importance of the development outweighs the local value of the site.
Policy NE2 states that planning permission will be refused for development if it would be likely to adversely affect animal or plant species, or their habitat, specifically protected by law.
Policy NE3 states that all new development exceeding 5 dwellings (in the case of residential development) or incorporating gross floorspace in excess of 1000 sq m (in the case of other development) will be required to incorporate proposals to enhance biodiversity and geological features which are appropriate to, and where possible compensate for, impacts on the immediate area and the site characteristics.
Due to constraints on the time of the year that the Environmental Statement was undertaken and lottery funding deadlines, survey coverage for all protected species along the whole length of the proposed waterway have only recently been able to be carried out by the applicant's agents.
Natural England, although originally objecting to the application in its current form citing that to fulfil the requirements and habitats regulations, adequate survey information is required prior to planning permission being granted, have now withdrawn their objection. Natural England have now indicated that they are satisfied with the previous survey work and proposed additional survey work for protected species including Great Crested Newts, otter and water voles, reptiles, bat activity, bat roosts, badgers and breeding birds. The additional survey work was carried out during the month of May 2007. It is expected that these findings and any comments can be reported verbally and outstanding issues dealt with by satisfactorily worded conditions.
The proposed project will inevitably result in the loss of habitats, however overall it is considered that the waterway will improve the current network of wildlife corridors and biodiversity. Provided that the required detailed species surveys are undertaken and appropriate actions carried out to mitigate any negative impacts, the scheme is likely to be able to avoid or compensate for all potentially significant impacts.
Socio economic and local residents concerns
The proposed route of the waterway is a mixture of residential and industrial areas, public open spaces, waterbodies and farmland, with much of the route already identified for future development.
Objections have been received from two individual residents together with a petition as reported above see numbering in representations section above).
1. This issue was touched on above, there will be noise, vibration and earth movements during construction but this would happen during any construction process and the eastern expansion area is likely to be developed out for a longer period than the proposed phasing of the waterway. Furthermore conditions could be applied to any permission to ensure that issues of noise and the direction of earth movements are kept to a minimum on residential amenity. 2. It is not considered that a waterway park would be likely to create an amenity which would lead to anti social behaviour. It has not been established whether there will be moorings along the route of this section of the waterway, this would be dealt with at a detailed stage, but the location of moorings would be looked at carefully in relation to residential amenity. 3. Although there is likely to be additional activity along a proposed waterway it is not considered that the location of the waterway, which would be sited at a minimum approximately 8m away from residential properties and at a lower level, would cause unacceptable loss of privacy. 4. There are no details of likely impacts on foundations, but the proposed waterway channel is not a deep structure, although there will be banking, the actual waterway would only be to an approximate depth of 1.5m. 5. Further work on flooding is currently being undertaken by the applicant's agents (as discussed above). 6. This has been addressed above and it is acknowledged that further surveys of wildlife etc. were required and is now being undertaken. 7. Again this is subject to further surveys in terms of water pollution. 8. The application has been advertised in the press by site notice and individual neighbour notification. There has also been meetings with parish councils and public meetings to highlight the proposal. 9. This application has been submitted to try and achieve certainty for the forthcoming lottery bid.
The Parks Trust have indicated their support of the proposal in principle and it is considered that their comments, other in relation to the re-routing of the canal, could be dealt with at the detailed stage.
In overall terms the Waterway Park would present an opportunity to provide a key leisure and tourist feature which would serve to enhance the existing and newly growing community in and around Milton Keynes, together with an important new link in the national waterway network when the remaining works to Bedford are completed.
Loss of employment land
The proposed waterway runs partly in Eastlake Park employment area of Fox Milne. Policy E1 applies and the most relevant policy test in relation to this application is criterion (iii) whether there would be a significant reduction in local employment opportunities.
The owners of employment site have written in objecting to the application on grounds that they do not wish to see land allocated for industrial use being included in the waterway route.
This is clearly an issue especially as an application for an office building on the alignment of the waterway has been received which proposes building over part of the area shown on the canal route under reference 07/00527/FUL. Outline planning permission was granted on the site in 1998 (98/01338/FUL) for an office campus.
The applicants for the waterway have been in discussion with the owners of Eastlake Park to resolve the issue and have submitted an amended plan showing the canal re-routed to substantially avoid the development site, avoiding direct conflict with the proposed buildings. Comments from the owners are awaited.
The site of the waterway also runs through part of proposed employment land within Atterbury. These are however small sections and it is not considered significant in terms of policy E1.
CONCLUSION
The proposed Waterway Park has been designed to blend within the existing topography of the route as far as possible and although there will be the loss of some trees and vegetation along the route additional planting should more than make up for this and once completed will provide a pleasant environment for both boat users and those who will use the parkland in which it will sit.
There is still, on concluding the report, additional work being undertaken in terms of further ecological studies during the month of May to satisfy Natural England and BBWOT. EA have not objected to the proposal. There is still additional dialogue with the IDB and EA to meet the technical requirements and the EA have put forward a number of conditions if the LPA are minded to approve the application. The IDB board have indicated their support in principle. It is our view that any outstanding concerns are capable of being dealt with by carefully worded Grampian Style planning conditions and or obligations which would prevent the scheme from going ahead until such concerns have been addressed prior to submission of a reserved matters application.
Issues raised by local residents are either being dealt with by further studies or can be satisfactorily dealt with by condition. Further talks are taking place between the applicants and the owners of Eastlake Park and an amended routing of the canal in this location has been received.
The proposed Waterway Park will provide a significant leisure facility which will provide direct links with the Eastern Expansion Area and the Centre of Milton Keynes and can be used for sustainable transport, leisure, commuting or exercise, as well as ultimately a national context for its navigational benefits.
Due to the continuing dialogue on writing the report with various consultees it is expected that this report will be updated by addendum and verbal report.
RECOMMENDATION
The application is recommended for APPROVAL subject to conditions relating to satisfactory survey and mitigation of outstanding ecological studies, flood risk assessments, hydraulic modelling of Broughton Brook, flows and navigation along Broughton Brook, biodiversity, landscaping, details of phasing, excavation of soil, lorry movements, details of crossings, details of locks, weirs and reservoirs, levels and any other conditions which are considered appropriate following discussions with consultees.
Report author / case officer – Jackie Fox Contact details - 01908 252283 [email protected]