Agenda Item 6.1

AGENDA ITEM 6.1

DR/02/16

committee DEVELOPMENT & REGULATION date 22 January 2016

COUNTY COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT Proposal: The demolition of the former Montgomerie Infants School building and the erection of a new Special Needs School with associated car and cycling parking, landscaping and infrastructure Location: Land adjacent to Glenwood Special School, Rushbottom Lane, Thundersley, Benfleet, Essex SS7 4LW Ref: CC/CPT/64/15 Applicant: Essex County Council

Report by Director of Operations, Environment and Economy Enquiries to: Glenn Shaw Tel: 03330 136873 The full application can be viewed at www.essex.gov.uk/viewplanning

Site Location Plan

Site Plan

1. BACKGROUND

The selection of the current site for a Special Needs School follows a long search to find an appropriate and available site. The journey towards a new purpose built special educational needs school began a decade ago as part of the Government’s Building Schools for the Future (BSF) programme with a new Glenwood School intended to be a part of Wave 4 of the BSF Programme. However, whilst new replacement secondary schools were provided at Cornelius Vermuyden School (within Green Belt) and new Castle View School on Canvey Island under the BSF programme, the replacement of Glenwood school was deferred from Wave 4 of the BSF programme as it became evident that the school’s existing site was not adequate to meet the school’s future needs. As part of Wave 5 of the BSF Programme the replacement Glenwood School was proposed to be part of the nearby redevelopment of the Deanes Secondary School in Thundersley. In May 2010 outline planning permission (reference CC/CPT/17/10) was achieved on this Green Belt site on the basis of the very special circumstances justifying the provision of the SEN School within Green Belt as part of the Deanes School redevelopment.

In June 2010 the County Council was informed that the BSF programme had been stopped by the government and the funding for this project had been lost. The

Council was committed to providing a new Glenwood School and in 2012 the co- location project was included in the Council’s capital programme from 2013 onwards. However, during 2013 there was a consultation on the future of the Deanes School and it was decided not to progress with the redevelopment of the Deanes School due to predicted overcapacity in local mainstream secondary school places. It was not feasible to provide a new Glenwood School on the Deanes School site in isolation and so a further search was carried out to identify a site to accommodate the new Glenwood School. The applicant has confirmed that the only suitable or available site identified was the current application site following the consolidation of the Montgomerie Primary School within its existing School site during 2015. The new Glenwood School building would replace the former Montgomerie Infants School building.

The Glenwood School site is currently characterised by single storey structures constructed in excess of thirty years ago and a number of temporary classrooms installed on site to meet the educational capacity requirements of the school. The applicant has stated that these buildings do not meet the relevant Building Standards and no longer provide the high quality educational facility required by children with Special Educational Needs.

2. SITE

The proposal site occupies and area of 3.6ha and is located on the former Montgomery Infants school which is a single storey building and is located to the west of Rushbottom Lane, on the western outskirts of Benfleet, Essex.

The site is bordered to the north by existing Glenwood School, to the east by Montgomerie School. There are residential properties on Rushbottom Lane and in Glebelands which adjoins the southern boundary of the proposed site.

On the site’s western boundary is the A130 with agricultural fields beyond. Access to the proposed new school would be via Rushbottom Lane using the existing site access.

There is established vegetation on the northern, western and southern boundaries of the site.

Located within the site is a main sewer pipe running in north to south direction.

There is a sewage treatment works to the north of the site.

The proposal site lies within the Metropolitan Green Belt; The Rushbottom Lane Flood Pound County Wildlife Site is to the north of the school site.

The site is allocated as Educational Facilities CF2 in Castle Point Borough Local plan adopted in November 1998.

3. PROPOSAL

The application seeks to demolish the former Montgomerie Infant School buildings

and provide a new school building for pupils with Special Educational Needs (SEN) with car and cycle parking, pedestrian walkways, multi-use games area, football pitches, hard and soft landscaping and associated works.

The new school would be located partly on the footprint of the demolished former Montgomerie Infant School Building and provide for 210 pupils; an increase in capacity of 95 students and an increase in staff from 76 fulltime equivalent positions to 136 equivalent full time positions. The application is in response to an increased demand and pressure for SEN school spaces within Castle Point and the need to address deficiencies with the existing school site in educational terms.

The new School would provide:

 27 classrooms with associated cloakrooms, group spaces and storage space.  A new school hall with changing facilities.  Pupil and staff toilet facilities.  A hydrotherapy facility including swimming pool and therapy space for student and community use.  A Multi-Use Games Area and other school play areas.  Kitchen and dining room, cleaning and maintenance facilities.  Meeting rooms and social space.  Two sports pitches; one adult full sized and one junior.  Car parking.  Landscaping and sustainable urban drainage systems.

The proposed building would be two storeys in height and a mono pitched roofed with timber and render cladding. In form the building would be spread over three distinct wings in an ‘E’ shape configuration. Internally the layout provides a ‘services’ corridor providing access to the wings and accommodation for the support services associated with the school such as offices, the school hall, kitchens and storage space.

The wings would provide the majority of the teaching accommodation. The building would sit on a north/south axis, facing onto the grounds of the school which will provide soft, hard, interactive and learning focused play space and a new Multi-Use Games Area (MUGA) for the use of the school and local community.

A full sized football pitch and an under 9/10 football pitch would also be maintained as part of the proposal, with the ability for two further under 9/10s pitches to be laid out on the full size pitch when it is not in use.

As a Special Needs School the associated infrastructure associated with the proposal includes provision for 101 car parking spaces, including 8 disabled bays, 16 cycle parking spaces and landscape planting which would be located to the north of the school building. The proposal also includes provision for 19 minibus parking spaces located on the north elevation of the school and would double up as school visitor parking in hours of the day when they are not in use by the minibuses.

The new SEN school campus would utilise the existing access for the existing

Montgomerie School onto Rushbottom Lane.

4. POLICIES

The following policies of the Castle Point Borough Council Adopted Local Plan November 1998 (CPLP) provide the development plan framework for this application. The following policies are of relevance to this application:

CPLP

Policy EC2 Design

Policy EC3 Residential Amenity

Policy EC 7 Natural And Semi-Natural Features In Urban Areas Policy EC13 Protection of wildlife and their habitats

Policy EC 14 Creation of wildlife and habitats Policy EC16 Protection of Landscape Policy EC22 Retention of trees, woodland & hedgerows

Policy EC 23 Tree and shrub planting Policy CF2 Education facilities

Policy CF9 Access & non-domestic development Policy CF14 Surface water disposal PolicyT2 Intensification of access use Policy T8 Car parking standards

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), published in March 2012, sets out requirements for the determination of planning applications and is also a material consideration.

Paragraph 215 of the NPPF states, in summary, that due weight should be given to relevant policies in existing plans according to their degree of consistency with the Framework. The level of consistency of the policies contained within the saved policies of the Castle Point Borough Council Adopted Local Plan November 1998 is considered further in the report.

At its meeting on 29 September 2011, Castle Point Borough Council resolved to withdraw its Core Strategy from the examination process and commence work on a New Local Plan. This Plan will set out the Council’s strategic approach to future development and growth in Castle Point. It will set out site allocations and also designations and policies to protect important elements of the local environment. It will also set out development management policies against which all planning applications will be considered. A draft New Local Plan has been prepared and at the Council’s meeting on 15th January 2014 it was agreed to undertake consultation on this. This consultation event ran until Friday 28th March 2014.

A formally constituted group of Members was formed to view the consultation responses received. The Task and Finish Group met regularly throughout late 2014 to undertake this work. The meetings originally scheduled for early 2015 have been postponed until further notice to allow for additional work to be undertaken.

In view that the New Local Plan has not been finalised and that there is still likely to be outstanding objection with regard to direction and policies contained within, it is not considered that the New Local Plan is at a sufficient stage of preparation to hold sufficient weight in the determination of this application.

Other policies that are of relevance to this application:

Sport England Planning Policy Statement: Policy on planning applications for development on playing fields.

5. CONSULTATIONS

CASTLE POINT BOROUGH COUNCIL – No objection.

ENVIRONMENT AGENCY – No objection.

NATURAL ENGLAND – No objection.

LOCAL LEAD FLOOD AUTHORITY – No objection subject to conditions for:

 a surface water strategy  a scheme for to minimise off site flooding  Maintenance plan for detailing maintenance arrangement for the surface water drainage

HIGHWAY AUTHORITY – No objection.

PLACE SERVICES (Landscape).

PLACE SERVICES (Historic Environment) – No objection.

PLACE SERVICES (Ecology) – No objection.

PLACE SERVICES (Urban design) – No objection.

PLACE SERVICES (Arboriculture) - No objection.

THE COUNCIL’S AIR QUALITY CONSULTANT – No objection

SPORT ENGLAND - No objection

ANGLIAN WATER - No objection subject to a condition for a surface water strategy and the inclusion of Informatives for assets crossing of the site subject to an adoption agreement and an application to discharge trade effluent.

BOWERS GIFFORD AND NORTH BENFLEET PARISH COUNCIL – No comments received

LOCAL MEMBER – CASTLE POINT – Thundersley – any comments received will be reported.

6. REPRESENTATIONS

47 properties were directly notified of the application. Five letters of representation have been received. These relate to planning issues covering the following matters:

Observation Comment

The impact of the development on the See appraisal visual amenity

The impact of an increased traffic on See appraisal. the roads with the expansion of the school

The loss of sunlight due the See appraisal development.

7. APPRAISAL

The key issues for consideration are:

A. Principle of the Development/Green Belt B. Design C. Landscape and Arboriculture D. Residential Amenity E. Highways Impact F. Parking G. Flood Risk and Drainage H. Playing Fields

A PRINCIPLE OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND GREEN BELT

The application site is located adjacent to the settlement boundary of Benfleet on land classified as Metropolitan Green Belt, as identified in the adopted Castle Point Borough Council Local Plan (1998) Proposals Map. On the proposals map the application site is identified for use as a school, which is a strong material consideration when considering the suitability of the application.

Policy GB1 of the adopted Castle Point Local Plan is considered to be not in conformity with the guidance of the national planning policy when reviewed in 2007. The NPPF will therefore represent the policy guidance when considering the principle of the development of a new school on this school site within the Green Belt.

Paragraph 79 of the NPPF states that the government attaches great importance to the Green Belt. The fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open. Educational development does not fall within the limited category of appropriate development in the Green Belt, which is limited to agricultural, forestry and other minor uses. The proposed development does not preserve the openness of the Green Belt and therefore is considered to be inappropriate development.

Inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances.

Paragraph 80 of the NPPF is considered to be particularly important in the determination of this planning application and the tests of this site against four of the five purposes of the Green Belt are considered further below:

The applicant has sought to demonstrate justification for the development within the Green Belt and that it doesn’t conflict with the purposed of including land within the Green Belt, namely:

1. To check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas:

The proposal to provide a new SEN school on the site would not contribute to unrestricted sprawl in Benfleet. The application site benefits from being enclosed at all borders. The A130 encloses western Benfleet and runs adjacent across the western border of the site beyond a landscaped border. The roadway provides a physical barrier to further development, ensuring that the settlement would not add to urban sprawl. The application site abounds the settlement boundary of Benfleet at its eastern and border and southern border, effectively encircling the site by residential development.

Beyond the application site’s heavily planted northern border, lies green scrubland under a Green Belt classification. The border planting would be maintained and enhanced and as part of the proposal with water attenuation landscape feature to the north of the site which it is considered would act as an additional the buffer. The A130 abounds the land to the north, physically preventing urban sprawl in this direction.

The open areas of Green Belt are located to the south- west of the application site and to the north- west of the application site. In this regard the built form of the school has been located to the far east of the application site, to minimise the impact on the more sensitive areas of Green Belt to the west, which would continue to be used as playing fields. It is considered that any proposal for the school building to be located further west would have the potential to cause harm to the Green Belt and would give the potential for further potential sprawl to the north and south. By locating the school to the east, it follows the built line of the residential properties to the south (which protrudes further west) to be maintained. The proposed school building relates well and will be viewed in context with the existing school buildings to the east, rather than an isolated building in the Green Belt.

The more sensitive areas of Green Belt to the west are required to be used for

sports pitches and this use would remain in perpetuity.

It is therefore considered that the proposed development can be adequately accommodated on site without resulting in unrestricted urban sprawl. The site is abounded at all borders by existing development and with the A130 ensuring that development would not spread in a westerly direction.

2. To prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another

It is recognised that one of the key challenges in this part of Essex is accommodating development to support growth, whilst at the same time seeking to maintain separation between settlements. The settlements of Benfleet, Thundersley, Haleigh, Rayleigh, Leigh- on- Sea, Bowers Gifford, Pitsea and Basildon are all located within very close proximity of each other, which creates a shortage of available Green Belt that can be developed without resulting in coalescence between settlements.

It is considered one of the key benefits of the application site is that new development can be accommodated without coalescence with adjacent settlements. In this regard the location of the school building has been situated to the east side of the site, to maintain the open Green Belt to the west. When examining localised coalescence the main settlements to consider are North Benfleet (west), Bowers Gifford (south west) and Basildon (west). The site is adjoined to the south and east by residential areas that form part of land within the settlement boundary of Benfleet.

Bowers Gifford and North Benfleet are the closest settlements (other than Benfleet) to the application site. Both settlements are separated from Benfleet by the Green Belt which includes areas of woodland and arable farmland. At the nearest point Bowers Gifford is located 475 metres from the application site, with North Benfleet 675 metres. Critically in terms of the avoidance of coalescence, the A130 runs directly along the western boundary of the application site, physically containing Benfleet’s urban development. The separation of the application site from North Benfleet and Bowers Gifford is clearly demonstrated within the location plan of the site.

In addition by locating the proposed building towards the east of the site, its impact would be minimised and it would not protrude any further west than the neighbouring residential properties to the south. It is therefore considered that more than adequate separation would be provided between the settlements of Benfleet, North Benfleet and Bowers Gifford as a result of this planning application.

3. To assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment

In order to safeguard the countryside from encroachment it is important to consider the impact of development on the Green Belt from a physical and visual perspective. As outlined above, in response to Green Belt purpose 2, the development of the Glenwood School would not it is considered catalyse unrestricted urban sprawl or physically extend development into the Green Belt due to the position of the A130 directly to the west of the site boundary. In terms

of encroachment, the new school building is proposed to sit partly on the built footprint of a former Montgomerie School Building, minimising its development imprint on the surrounding landscape. In addition, the existing residential properties to the south of the school site on Glebelands protrude further west than the proposed school building. It is considered these properties would visually shelter the site from views to the south and ensure that the new school building would not appear to be overly prominent.

4. To assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.

It is recognised that the site has been used by the Montgomerie School and its predecessors for a period of approximately 50 years, it is not considered that the site may be described as derelict or other urban land. This strategic objective is not therefore considered relevant in the determination of this matter. In terms of the principle of the proposed development, the site carries a dual allocation for Green Belt and School purposes. There are many schools within the Green Belt in Castle Point Borough Council and the sensitive use of these schools to enhance educational opportunities has been considered favourably.

Whilst the current proposal would have an adverse impact on the openness of the Green Belt at this location, and would result in a diminution in the space between settlements and encroach into the countryside, the dual allocation of the site, the Government’s encouragement of the improvement of educational facilities and opportunities, as recognised in Policy CF2 of the Castle Point adopted Local Plan, and the identified need for SEN facilities, coupled with the absence of an alternative appropriate site and the familiarity of the site to existing SEN students, which it is considered is very important to the wellbeing of SEN Students.

Very Special Circumstances.

As stated, the proposal is considered to be inappropriate development within the Green Belt.

Paragraph 88 of the NPPF goes onto to state “that when considering any application local authorities should ensure that substantial weight is given to any harm to the Green Belt. ‘Very Special Circumstances’ will not exist unless the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness and any other harm are clearly outweighed by other considerations”.

The NPPF also sets out that for proposals within the Metropolitan Green Belt, the ‘presumption in favour of sustainable development’ as set out within paragraph 14 of the NPPF does not apply. With regard to national policy, it is therefore important to consider whether there are any ‘very special circumstances for the proposals that outweighs the harm caused to the Green Belt that would render this development acceptable in planning terms.

The applicant has sought to demonstrate Very Special Circumstances as follows:

Current Status of School:

Both the existing Glenwood and Montgomerie Schools are both classified as being school sites situated within the Green Belt. The proposed school building is located partly where the former Montgomerie School infants’ building to be demolished is located. The proposed building is of two storeys in height. It has additional mass and footprint of the building to be demolished and would therefore have some impact on the Green Belt. However, in terms of use with the site being specifically designated for use as a school, the proposed new building is considered to be compatible with this use. This it is considered is a material consideration when considering the acceptability of the development in the Green Belt.

Educational Need:

In considering very special circumstances, paragraph 72 of the NPPF outlines the importance that the Government places upon “providing sufficient capacity to meet educational need. This comprises an obligation to plan the requirements of communities in the present and in the future. Against this background Local planning authorities are urged to take a proactive, positive and collaborative approach in order to”:

‘Give great weight to the need to create, expand or alter schools; and work with schools promoters to identify and resolve key planning issues before applications are submitted.’

The existing Glenwood School site is characterised by single storey structures constructed in excess of thirty years ago along with demountable temporary classrooms installed on site to meet the educational capacity requirements of the school. The current buildings do not meet the Building Bulletin Standards and the teaching facilities do not provide a good educational learning facility. Clearly, due to the wide spectrum of pupil abilities and needs at the school, it is important to provide a new facility to provide facilities to meet modern day education needs. The Special Education Need status of the Glenwood School means that it covers a wide catchment area for pupils, which has added to the need for the school to expand.

The Glenwood School has been earmarked for expansion for an extended period of time. The requirement to create, alter or expand schools is particularly relevant in this instance given the schools special education status; the Glenwood School supports a large catchment area including Castle Point and Rochford Districts capacity demands on the school to provide places for young people in the catchment area are therefore extremely high.

The erection of a new school has the potential to provide a wide range of educational benefits to students that are fully supported by paragraph 72 of the NPPF. This would include provision of classrooms of an appropriate size, to meet building educational standards, a dedicated hydrotherapy pool and school hall. It would also facilitate an increase in capacity at the school to ensure that the statutory requirement to provide an education facility for all can be met.

Conclusion on Green Belt:

It is considered that the aforementioned justification does represent Very Special Circumstances to justify the development within the Green Belt and this should be considered to hold significant weight in the determination of this planning application. In addition it also needs to be recognised that the application site is formally adopted for education use within the adopted Local Plan Proposals Map (1998). The proposed continued use of this site for education purposes is therefore considered to be in compliant with this policy.

The proposed enhancement and improvement of existing educational facilities would also be fully supported by adopted Local Plan Policy CF2 (Education Facilities). In addition, although of lesser weight the proposals would provide a benefit in terms of significantly increasing the level of car parking on site, which would reduce the level of congestion outside the school on Rushbottom Lane and the surrounding area. This has been acknowledged as a constraint of the existing school site. This aligns with paragraph 30 of the NPPF which states that encouragement should be given for solutions, which reduce congestion. This improvement is also considered to represent a very special reason for the development to take place in the Green Belt.

Transport matters are however discussed in further detail in the report.

B DESIGN

The location of the building on the site was chosen in order to minimise the impact of the building on the openness of the Green Belt. It also responded to the current constraints of the site, with a sewer main running to the west of the proposed building which has a 10 metre standoff. The A130 was a consideration in terms of acoustic generation and its proximity to the site has influenced where the placement of the new School Building has been situated. The new school building has been located as far as reasonably possible from the roadway to minimise its noise impact.

In order to achieve an appropriate level of accommodation on the site to meet identified SEN requirements, without compromising the sewer which crosses the site in a north/south alignment, or extending further into the Green Belt, a two storey, flat roofed building is proposed with car parking provided to the north of the site and playspace and pitches provided to the west.

The proposed school is some 93m long and a maximum width of 58m and is provided with an ‘E’ shaped footprint, providing a service corridor to the east and projecting wings of classrooms to the west, overlooking courtyard play spaces.

The proposed building would have a flat roof (5% pitch) with a parapet which would limit the height of the building and is considered to be appropriate and reflects that of a number of existing primary school buildings in the area, including the adjacent Montgomerie School.

The school would have 2 entrances, one for pupils which would be located on the north elevation and one for staff and visitors located on the east elevation.

It is proposed that on the west elevation that play areas and sensory garden

would be provided.

It is proposed that the building would be mainly render with key features picked out in timber. The neutral colour of the render together with the natural shades of the timber would be interrupted where necessary by splashes of blue to identify key building elements such as the visitor entrance. Colour and texture around the building is used to facilitate wayfinding.

Tactile panels would be gradually introduced by the school around the school building, both externally and internally to help pupils to identify routes and to learn about materials and textures.

It is considered that the timber elements of the building would assist in teaching the pupils about natural materials and provide the opportunity for the school to bring along the ‘woodland’ element that is so much part of the current Glenwood site.

Large glazing elements within the courtyards would allow for views out towards the green playing fields and allow for natural daylight to penetrate the school corridors. This solution it is considered would make the areas of the school that are designed for social interaction become true ‘squares’ along a street. It is further considered that this would allow the school to have a “village type feel” where pupils can grow and can learn about being independent in a safe environment, socialize with adults and other peers outside the classroom.

CPLP Policy EC2 (Design) states inter alia that “a high standard of design in relation to new buildings and extensions and alterations to existing buildings will be expected throughout the district. Particular regard will be paid to the scale, density, siting, design, layout and external materials of any development, which will be appropriate to its setting and which should not harm the character of its surroundings.”

Castle Point Borough Council and Places Services (Urban Design) have not objected to the proposal on Design Grounds.

It is considered that the proposal would be in accordance with policy EC2 as the scale, density, siting, location, design, layout and external materials of the new school are considered to be appropriate to its setting. It is further considered that the school building does not harm the character of its surroundings.

C LANDSCAPE AND ARBORICULTURE

CPLP policies EC7, EC13, EC14, EC16, EC22 and EC23 seek to ensure the protection of existing amenity, limiting environmental impact, tree and shrub planting.

With respect to Landscape, the applicant has submitted a landscape and visual impact assessment. The assessments states “The key approach to the building location and the landscape principles for the proposed development is to work within and to retain the landscape features of the Site as far as is possible. The natural framework of boundary scrub and trees around the Site is retained and will

provide some ready maturity and retain the enclosure of the Site”. The assessment goes on to state “whilst some trees are removed for development these are within the proposed building or car park area and do not compromise the general level of screening”.

The main field oak tree located on the south elevation would be retained and accommodated within the design of the school’s formal playground. The value of all retained trees is also respected within the proposed development with consideration of Root Protection Areas and requirements for ‘no-dig’ construction as defined in the Arboriculture Report. The majority of existing hedgerows and trees are therefore retained and are part of the wider framework of field boundaries and screening of the A130 which would continue to contribute to the landscape character of the area. Their retention and long term management also ensures this wider framework is conserved and continues to provide a wider screening function.

The location and layout of the car parking area has been designed to reduce views of parking from residential areas but to ensure safe pick-up and drop-off from the main school entrance.

The report further states that the landscape approach incorporates a number of principles which have the potential to benefit the proposed development and the existing landscape as well as nature conservation interests. The assessment acknowledges that there would be some reduction in playing fields area the proposals include the following landscape enhancements and compensatory measures:

Native tree planting along the edge of the car park and additional planting to enhance the existing hedgerows which it is considered would reduce its visual influence on the openness and character of the area.

With respect to Arboriculture, an arboricultural assessment has been submitted. The assessment recommends the removal of 16 trees on the south, east and northern elevations of the site. The remaining trees on site would have as part of the proposal root protection mitigation measures during the construction phase. The assessment also stated that as part of the development, 16 new heavy standard trees should be planted to mitigate the loss of any trees.

Castle Point Borough Council and Places Services (Landscape and Arboriculture) have not objected to the proposal on Landscape or Arboricultural Grounds.

It is considered that the proposal would be in accordance with CPLP policies EC7, EC13, EC14, EC16, EC22 and EC23 as the proposal is an existing school site and although there would be some loss of the playing field and some trees. A tree and landscape would be implement which in time would enhance the local area.

D RESIDENTIAL AMENITY

CPLP Policy EC3 states that “development proposals, which would have a significant adverse effect upon the residential amenity of the surrounding area by reason of traffic, noise, fumes or other forms of disturbance will be refused”.

With regard to amenity in terms of privacy and overbearing impact, the Castle Point Local plan has no specific policy provision relevant to school development, although the NPPF provides general guidance on the need to protect the amenity of existing residents (paragraph 17).

Castle Point Borough Council has adopted a Residential Design Guide as a Supplementary Planning Document. Although this relates solely to residential properties, it does contain guidelines that seek to protect neighbouring residential amenity and its application in this case would therefore appear to be appropriate. In this regard, the key consideration is the impact that the school building would have upon residential properties to the south of the school. RDG5 of the Residential Design Guidance relates to Privacy & Living Conditions. This states “that for all development above ground level a distance of 9 metres shall be provided between windows and the boundary it directly faces at first floor level”.

The proposed school is situated some 19 metres from the boundary of the nearest residential property to the south of the site, which is well in excess of the minimum standard. Back to back distances between the school and the neighbouring properties are in excess of 40m, to ensure no negative impact on neighbouring residential amenity. In addition additional landscape planting is proposed along the southern boundary, to supplement the existing vegetation already in place, to provide further screening to the neighbouring properties.

Given the level of isolation achieved between proposed and existing development and the proposals for additional screening, it is not considered that there would be a significant negative impact upon neighbouring residents in terms of loss of privacy or overlooking.

With regard to the potential for overshadowing and dominance, it should be noted that the proposed building has a maximum height of some 9.75m. Given the distance achieved between the building and the site boundary and the relative orientation of the proposed and existing development it is not considered that the proposal would lead to undue overshadowing or dominance.

With respect to noise, the applicant has submitted Construction Management Plan which provides full details of how construction arrangement would work to minimise disturbance to nearby receptors and ensure managed impacts on the highway.

Castle Point Borough Council has not objected to the proposal on residential amenity.

It is not considered that the proposal would have a significant adverse effect upon the residential amenity by way of traffic, noise, fumes or other forms of disturbance and would therefore be in accordance with the provisions of CPLP Policy EC3.

E HIGHWAYS IMPACT

The NPPF places a strong emphasis on the need to promote sustainable modes

of transport. Paragraph 32 of the NPPF states “that opportunities for sustainable modes of transport to the site should be promoted and that safe and suitable access to the site should be achieved for all people”.

CPLP policy T2 states - Intensification of Access Use:

“Proposals which would result in the intensification of the use of existing accesses or the creation of new accesses onto any trunk, principal or other classified road will, in appropriate cases, require the submission of a traffic impact study demonstrating the ability of the highway network to accommodate the proposed development”.

Where such demonstration cannot be shown, or where there is a policy objection from the highway authority, permission will be refused.

When considering applications that would affect these roads the council will consult the highway authority and will take the advice received into account when determining applications for planning permission”.

CPLP Policy CF9 states- Access and Non-Domestic Development:

“The Council will expect all appropriate development and the space around such development to be designed to be accessible for people with disabilities”.

The applicant has submitted a detailed Transport Assessment to measure the impact of the proposed development as well as the suitability of the proposed access works to accommodate development.

The Transport Assessment confirms that the proposed access to the site is from the former access to the former infant’s school on Rushbottom Lane, which is already used by Montgomerie School, This provides appropriate access to the proposed development and it is considered offers significant opportunity to improve highway conditions in the locality.

At the present time 88% of all pupils travel to and from the school by county provided minibuses; this translates to approximately 100 pupils arriving in 20 – 25 vehicles. Staff arrivals at the school typically take place prior to the students at 8:15 – 9:00, 60% of staff currently arrive by car.

The proposal seeks to increase the number of students from 115 to 210. This equates to an additional 84 pupils arriving at the school in approximately 20 County Council operated minibuses. In addition, a further 9 pupils would arrive by private car.

The submitted Transport Assessment identifies a 15% increase in staff numbers as a result of the proposal, with full and part time staff increasing from 117 to 136. Given the current staff modal split, approximately 12 additional staff related vehicular trips could be associated with the development.

The total trips that could be associated with the proposal will therefore be approximately 172 trips in the AM peak and 172 trips in the PM peak.

An assessment of junctions in proximity to the school was undertaken at peak times in order to quantify the likely impacts associated with an increase in capacity at the school. The capacity assessments confirmed that the increase in pupils and staff can be accommodated by the adjoining highway network. It is therefore considered that the proposal for the Glenwood School accords with the principles of paragraph 32 of the NPPF and CPLP policies T2 and CF9.

Glenwood School has submitted a travel plan as part of this proposal.

Castle Point Borough Council and the Highway Authority have not objected to the proposal on highway impacts.

F CAR PARKING.

CPLP POLICY T8 - Car Parking Standards

“The Council will apply, with specified exceptions1, the revised standards for car parking in Essex, published by the Essex County Council.

Essex Planning Officers Association (EPOA) Vehicle Parking Standards (2009), which states Primary and Secondary schools are required to provide a maximum of 1 vehicle space per 15 pupils, which would result in a maximum of 9 vehicle parking spaces. However, there are no standards for Special Schools and the Informative Notes of the document states that “Special schools can be varied in their requirements and should be looked at on their own merits. Special Schools parking / drop off arrangements must be taken into consideration as generally extra staff are required and most pupils / students arrive by taxi or car”.

The current level of parking provision at Glenwood School is 14 car parking spaces comprising 10 formal spaces with informal space for a further four vehicles.

The proposal includes provision for 101 dedicated car parking spaces with 19 minibus spaces and the opportunity for the dual use of the minibus parking spaces by visitors, when not in use.

This is a significant increase in on-site parking provision and exceeds the recommended maximum standards. However the adopted standards are clear that flexibility should be provided for SEN proposals.

It is further considered that the proposals would also seek to solve an existing problem having regard to congestion on Rushbottom Lane and surrounding roads, around Glenwood and Montgomerie School. In this regard, it is considered that the proposals would provide for a significant benefit of the scheme and would enable staff to park on site, rather than on the surrounding roads. It would also enable all minibuses to enter the site to drop off the pupils.

Cycle Parking: The Essex Parking Standards (2009) define the quantity of cycle parking required to support the proposal. However, this standard is inappropriate given the unique usage requirements of Glenwood as a Special Educational

Needs school which means that almost all pupils attend the school either by supported minibus transit or by being dropped off by parents in cars. However, in order to encourage sustainable patterns of movement to the school, 16 cycle parking places would be provided as part of the proposals.

Castle Point Borough Council and the Highway Authority have not objected to the proposal on parking availability.

It is therefore considered that the proposal accords with CPLP policy T8.

G FLOOD RISK AND DRAINAGE MATTERS

CPLP policy CF14 - Surface Water Disposal states;

“in all cases where development would result in significantly increased surface water run-off, the council will require appropriate improvements to watercourse capacity to be undertaken before development commences”.

The application is accompanied by a detailed full Flood Risk Assessment report which identifies that the site is situated within Flood Zone 1 and has a ‘less’ to ‘intermediate’ susceptibility to surface water flooding for a 1 in 200 year return period storm event.

A detailed drainage plan has also been prepared which includes provision for an attenuation basin in the north-west corner of the site and demonstrates that the proposals can be delivered without impacting upon flood risk off site.

Anglian Water has not objected to the proposal subject to a condition for a surface water strategy and Informatives for any crossings of the site which would be subject to an adoption agreement and an application to discharge trade effluent.

The Local Lead Flood Authority has not objected subject to conditions for a surface water strategy, a scheme for to minimise off site flooding, maintenance plan for detailing maintenance arrangement for the surface water drainage.

The Local Lead Flood Authority, Environment Agency and Castle Point Borough Council has not objected to the proposal on Flood Risk and Drainage Matters

It is therefore considered that the proposal accords with CPLP policy CF14

H PLAYING FIELDS AND COMMUNITY USE

When responding to planning applications Sport England refers to the Sport England Planning Policy Statement, a Sporting Future for the Playing Fields of England. Whilst this document does not formally form part of the Development Plan at either national or local level, it is used as guidance by Sport England.

Policy P1 states that Sport England “will oppose the granting of planning permission for any development, which would lead to the loss of, or would prejudice the use of, a playing field, unless in the judgement of Sport England, specific circumstances apply which would allow a departure from policy”.

Policy E4 One of the Exceptions “is where the playing field or playing fields, which would be lost as a result of the proposed development, would be replaced by a playing field or playing fields of an equivalent or better quality and of equivalent or greater quantity, in a suitable location and subject to equivalent or better management arrangements”.

This policy document clearly needs to be considered in conjunction with wider adopted Development Plan considerations at both local and national level.

Sport England was a key statutory consultee in the pre-application design process. The development site until recently maintained sporting provision in support of three local sports teams; Kingsdown Rangers a men’s football team, Supreme Soccer and Supreme Youth. These teams re-located off site in the summer of 2015 and would remain offsite until the completion of the construction stage. It is anticipated however that they would return to the site sometime in the future.

The proposal would result in a reduction in the open land available, however, the land lost does not provide formal sport pitches and the proposal is therefore unlikely to adversely impact on formal sport play space on the site.

Furthermore, the applicant has indicated an intention to maximise the opportunity for community use and to this end has committed to enter into a Community Use Agreement, to secure the long term community use of the site. This would include use of both external and internal areas of the site, including the MUGA, School Hall and Hydro-therapy Pool, with associated changing rooms.

All of these facilities have been designed to maximise the benefit to school users, accounting for the SEN status of the school. The MUGA has been designed to allow for basketball and general sports and recreational training and play and is suitable for wheelchair (and other ball) use, which is a key requirement of the school. The Hydrotherapy pool is also a key requirement of the school. It is also considered that the enhanced facilities for community use represents a significant local benefit

The proposals would ensure that all three football clubs (Kingsdown Rangers, Supreme Soccer and Supreme Youth) can remain on site in perpetuity. The school has indicated a willingness to enter into a community use agreement in order to secure the long term community use of the pitches and facilities.

Castle Point Borough Council and Sport England have not objected to the proposal on Playing Fields And Community Use

The proposals are considered to fully satisfy the requirements of Policy E4, in that although there would be a loss of land, which could be used for playing pitches, this is mitigated by the new school hall, hydrotherapy room and MUGA pitch.

8. CONCLUSION

The proposal seeks to provide a new purpose built SEN School, with car and

cycle parking provision, internal and external sports and recreation facilities, which would be available for community use, and associated infrastructure.

The key considerations are the acceptability of the principle of such development in the Green Belt, the specific location and design of the proposed School, the impact on the amenity of adjoining residential properties, the impact on the highway and Car and Cycle parking.

In terms of the principle of the development, whilst the site is allocated for Green Belt purposes in the adopted Local Plan, the site carries the dual allocation for School purposes. This factor, coupled with Government advice in respect of the provision of a wide range of high quality educational opportunities and the identified need for a Special Needs School in the area, which together with the limited impact of the proposal on the openness and strategic function of the Green Belt at this location are considered to represent the very special circumstances required to outweigh the harm to the Green Belt.

In terms of more detailed matters the proposed development is considered to be of an appropriate design and location and unlikely to have a significant adverse impact on the amenity of adjoining residents in terms of overshadowing, dominance or overlooking.

Furthermore, the provision of a significantly increased parking provision and access to a variety of recreational and sports facilities would have significant benefits for the local community.

It is considered that the proposal would be in accordance with the development plan saved policies of the Castle Point Borough Council Local Plan adopted November 1998 - Policy EC2 (Design), Policy EC3 (Residential Amenity) and Policy CF2 (Education Facilities),Policy EC13 (Protection of wildlife and their habitats), Policy EC 14 (Creation of wildlife and habitats),Policy EC22(Retention of trees, woodland & hedgerows),Policy EC 23 (Tree and shrub planting) Policy CF2 (Education facilities),Policy CF9 (Access & non-domestic development),Policy CF14 (Surface water disposal), PolicyT2 (Intensification of access use),Policy T8 (Car parking standards).

It is therefore considered that planning permission should be granted.

9. RECOMMENDED

That pursuant to Regulation 3 of the Town and Country Planning General Regulations 1992, planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiry of 5 years from the date of this permission. Written notification of the date of commencement shall be sent to the County Planning Authority within 7 days of such commencement.

2 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the details of the application dated 30 October 2015 and validated on 3 November

2015, together with:  Planning Statement prepared by Strutt & Parker dated October 2015;  Material Schedule prepared by Allen Scott Landscape Architecture Planning Rev C dated October 2015;  Daylighting Report prepared by Johns Slater and Howard dated 29 October 2015;  Arboricultural Impact Assessment prepared by A. T Coombes dated 7 October 2015;  Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment prepared by Allen Scott Landscape Architecture dated October 2015;  Acoustic Assessment Report Reference MS/100631/R1 prepared by MLM dated 26 October 2015;  Transport Assessment prepared by Morgan Sindall dated March 2015;  Glenwood School Travel Plan prepared Steve Amann dated February 2015;  Underground Utilities Search Report Reference No1:772374 Ref N02, prepared by Cornerstone Projects Ltd dated 15 December 2014;  Site Specific Flood Risk Assessment reference PLW/665929/CH Rev 3 prepared by MLM dated October 2015;  Phase 1 Contamination Assessment Report Ref: 772374-REP-ENV-001 REV1 prepared by A. Burt dated 2 October 2015;  Design and Access Statement prepared by Curl La Tourelle Architects (undated);  Preliminary Ecological Appraisal Ref: 772374-REP-ENV-002REV2 prepared for MLM dated 28 October 2015;  Phase 2 Geo-environmental Assessment Report Ref; 772374-REP-ENV- 002REV2 prepared by MLM dated 2 October 2015;  Draft Community Use Agreement dated October 2015;  drawing numbers 529-P-101-REVM reference Proposed Site Plan dated 11 January 2016;  Drawing number 529-P-001 reference Location Plan dated 25 February 2015;  Drawing number 529-P-002 reference Existing Site Plan dated 25 February 2015;  Drawing number 529-P-003 reference Photographic Survey dated 25 February 2015;  Drawing number 529-P-004 reference Existing Sport Provision dated 25 February 2015;  Drawing number 529-P-120 reference Boundary Treatment Plan dated 5 March 2015;  Drawing number 529-P-121 reference Area Designations dated 5 March 2015;  Drawing number 529-P-122 reference Proposed Sport Provision dated 25 February 2015;  Drawing number 961 102 Rev C reference Site Sections dated 28 October 2015;  Drawing number 961 103 reference External Plant and Stores dated 8 October 2015;  Drawing number 961 201 reference Ground Floor Plan dated 8 October 2015;  Drawing number 961 202 reference First Floor Plan dated 8 October 2015;  Drawing number 961 203 reference Second Floor Plan (Roof access Level)

dated 8 October 2015;  Drawing number 961 204 reference Roof Plan dated 15 October 2015;  Drawing number 961 401 Rev B reference North and East Elevations dated 28 October 2015;  Drawing number 961 402 Rev B reference south and West Elevations dated 28 October 2015;  Drawing number 961 403 Rev B reference Internal Courtyard Elevations dated 28 October 2015;  Drawing number 961 694 reference Courtyard Canopies + Separation Low Fences dated 09 October 2015;  Drawing number 529-P-150 reference Landscape Sections dated 2 March 2015;  Drawing number 529-P-110 reference GA- Parking and Access dated 2 March 2015;  Drawing number 529-P-111 reference GA- Playground dated 2 March 2015;  Drawing number 665929/102 Rev P3 reference Drainage General Arrangement dated 9 March 2015;  Drawing number D25847/LKM/F reference BREAM dated 2 November 2015;  Drawing number 14705/T/01-03 reference Topographic & underground Service Survey – all areas dated December 2014;  Drawing number 14705/T/02-03 reference Topographic & underground Service Survey – all areas Glenwood School dated December 2014;  Drawing number 14705/T/03-03 reference Topographic & underground Service Survey – all areas Glenwood School dated December 2014;  Logistics Planning Drawing number 2 Stage -01 reference Enabling works – Week 1;  Logistics Planning Drawing number 2 Stage -02 reference Site works;  Logistics Planning Drawing number 2 Stage -03 reference Main Construction Zone;  Logistics Planning Drawing number 2 Stage -04 reference Site entrance – Security;  Logistics Planning Drawing number 2 Stage -05 reference Site Layout;  Logistics Planning Drawing number 2 Stage -06 reference Site Layout;  Logistics Planning Drawing number 2 Stage -07 reference Temporary Access;

and in accordance with any non-material amendment(s) as may be subsequently approved in writing by the County Planning Authority, except as varied by the following conditions:

3 Within 6 months from the date of approval of the development hereby permitted a landscape scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the County Planning Authority. The scheme shall include details of areas to be planted with species, sizes, spacing, protection and programme of implementation. The scheme shall also include details of any existing trees and hedgerows on site with details of any trees and/or hedgerows to be retained and measures for their protection during the period of construction of the development. The scheme shall be implemented within the first available planting season (October to March inclusive) following completion of the development hereby permitted in accordance with the approved details and maintained thereafter in accordance with condition 4 of this permission

4 Any tree or shrub forming part of a landscaping scheme approved in connection with the development under Condition 3 of this permission that dies, is damaged, diseased or removed within the duration of 5 years during and after the completion of the development (operations) shall be replaced during the next available planting season (October to March inclusive) with a tree or shrub to be agreed in advance in writing by the County Planning Authority.

5 No fixed lighting shall be erected or installed on-site until details of the location, height, design, luminance and operation have been submitted to and approved in writing by the County Planning Authority. The submitted scheme shall include an overview of the lighting design including the maintenance factor and lighting standard applied together with a justification as why these are considered appropriate. The details to be submitted shall include a lighting drawing showing the lux levels on the ground, angles of tilt and the average lux (minimum and uniformity) for all external lighting proposed. Furthermore a contour plan shall be submitted for the site detailing the likely spill light, from the proposed lighting, in context of the adjacent site levels. The details shall ensure the lighting is designed to minimise the potential nuisance of light spillage on adjoining properties and highways. The lighting scheme shall thereafter be erected, installed and operated in accordance with the approved details.

6 No development shall take place until a detailed scheme for a surface water management strategy has been submitted to and approved in writing by the County Planning Authority. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved strategy.

7 No development shall take place until a scheme to minimise the risk of offsite flooding caused by surface water run-off and groundwater during construction works has been submitted to and approved in writing by the County Planning Authority. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved scheme.

8 No development shall take place until a Maintenance Plan, detailing the maintenance arrangements including who is responsible for different elements of the surface water drainage system and the maintenance activities/frequencies, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the County Planning Authority. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved plan.

Informatives.

1. Anglian Water has assets close to or crossing this site or there are assets subject to an adoption agreement. Therefore the site layout should take this into account and accommodate those assets within either prospectively adoptable highways or public open space. If this is not practicable then the sewers will need to be diverted at the developers cost under Section 185 of the Water Industry Act 1991.or, in the case of apparatus under an adoption agreement, liaise with the owners of the apparatus. It should be noted that the diversion works should normally be completed before development can commence.

2. An application to discharge trade effluent must be made to Anglian Water and must have been obtained before any discharge of trade effluent can be made to the public sewer.

Anglian Water recommends that petrol / oil interceptors be fitted in all car parking/washing/repair facilities. Failure to enforce the effective use of such facilities could result in pollution of the local watercourse and may constitute an offence.

Anglian Water also recommends the installation of a properly maintained fat traps on all catering establishments. Failure to do so may result in this and other properties suffering blocked drains, sewage flooding and consequential environmental and amenity impact and may also constitute an offence under section 111 of the Water Industry Act 1991.

REASON FOR APPROVAL

Subject to the imposition of the attached conditions, the proposal is considered acceptable having been assessed in the light of all material considerations, including weighting against the following policies of the development plan:

Castle Point Borough Council Local Plan adopted November 1998

Policy EC2 – Design Policy EC3 – Residential Amenity Policy EC 7 - Natural And Semi-Natural Features In Urban Areas Policy EC13 - Protection of wildlife and their habitats Policy EC 14 - Creation of wildlife and habitats Policy EC16 - Protection Of Landscape Policy EC22 - Retention of trees, woodland & hedgerows Policy EC 23 - Tree and shrub planting Policy CF 2 – Education Facilities Policy CF9 - Access & non-domestic development Policy CF14 - Surface water disposal PolicyT2 - Intensification of access use Policy T8 - Car parking standards

Statement of Reasons

The proposal seeks to provide a new purpose built SEN School, with car and cycle parking provision, internal and external sports and recreation facilities, which would be available for community use, and associated infrastructure.

In terms of the principle of the development, whilst the site is allocated for Green Belt purposes in the adopted Local Plan, the site carries the dual allocation for

School purposes. This factor, coupled with Government advice in respect of the provision of a wide range of high quality educational opportunities and the identified need for a Special Needs School in the area, which together with the limited impact of the proposal on the openness and strategic function of the Green Belt at this location are considered to represent the very special circumstances required to outweigh the harm to the Green Belt.

Furthermore, the provision of a significantly increased parking provision and access to a variety of recreational and sports facilities would have significant benefits for the local community.

It is considered that the proposal would be in accordance with the following saved policies of the Castle Point Borough Council Local Plan adopted November 1998 - Policy EC2 (Design), Policy EC3 (Residential Amenity) and Policy CF2 (Education Facilities),Policy EC13 (Protection of wildlife and their habitats), Policy EC 14 (Creation of wildlife and habitats),Policy EC22 (Retention of trees, woodland & hedgerows),Policy EC 23 (Tree and shrub planting) Policy CF2 (Education facilities),Policy CF9 (Access & non-domestic development),Policy CF14(Surface water disposal), PolicyT2 (Intensification of access use),Policy T8(Car parking standards).

It is therefore considered that planning permission should be granted.

BACKGROUND PAPERS

Application Reference CC/CPT/64/15 Consultation replies Representations

THE CONSERVATION OF HABITATS AND SPECIES REGULATIONS 2010 (as amended)

The proposed development is not located within the vicinity of a Special Area of Conservation (SAC) or Special Protection Area (SPA) and is not directly connected with or necessary to the management of those sites. Therefore, it is considered that an Appropriate Assessment under Regulation 61 of The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 is not required.

EQUALITIES IMPACT ASSESSMENT

This report only concerns the determination of an application for planning permission. It does however take into account any equality implications. The recommendation has been made after consideration of the application and supporting documents, the development plan, government policy and guidance, representations and all other material planning considerations as detailed in the

body of the report.

STATEMENT OF HOW THE LOCAL AUTHORITY HAS WORKED WITH THE APPLICANT IN A POSITIVE AND PROACTIVE MANNER

In determining this planning application, the County Planning Authority has worked with the applicant in a positive and proactive manner based on seeking solutions to problems arising in relation to dealing with the planning application by liaising with consultees, respondents and the applicant/agent and discussing changes to the proposal where considered necessary or appropriate. This approach has been taken positively and proactively in accordance with the requirements of the NPPF, as set out in the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015.

LOCAL MEMBER NOTIFICATION

LOCAL MEMBER – CASTLE POINT – Thundersley