AGENDA ITEM

7

COMMITTEE: DEVELOPMENT CONTROL

DATE: 16 JANUARY 2019

SUBJECT: POWER COURT, LUTON - OUTLINE PLANNING PERMISSION, WITH ALL MATTERS RESERVED EXCEPT FOR ACCESS, FOR MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT COMPRISING: A NEW FOOTBALL STADIUM (USE CLASS D2), WITH ANCILLARY STADIUM-RELATED FACILITIES (INCLUDING SPECTATOR AND MEDIA FACILITIES, CONFERENCE ROOMS, CATERING FACILITIES AND COMMERCIAL SPACE); RESIDENTIAL FLOORSPACE (USE CLASS C3); FLEXIBLE EDUCATIONAL/COMMUNITY/COMMERCIAL USES (USE CLASS D1/D2/B1(A)); HOTEL ACCOMMODATION (USE CLASS C1); RETAIL AND FOOD AND DRINK (USE CLASS A1-A5); A FOOD STORE (USE CLASS A1) CAR AND CYCLE PARKING; AND ASSOCIATED ACCESS, HIGHWAYS, UTILITIES, PUBLIC REALM, LANDSCAPING, RIVER WORKS AND ASSOCIATED ANCILLARY WORKS AND STRUCTURES.

APPLICANT: 2020 DEVELOPMENTS (LUTON) LTD (ON BEHALF OF LUTON FOOTBALL CLUB)

APPLICATION NO: 16/01400/OUTEIA

REPORT BY: DEVELOPMENT CONTROL MANAGER

CONTACT OFFICER: DAVID HALL 546317

IMPLICATIONS:

LEGAL COMMUNITY SAFETY

EQUALITIES ENVIRONMENT

FINANCIAL CONSULTATIONS

STAFFING OTHER

WARDS AFFECTED: SOUTH

PURPOSE

1. To advise Members of an outline application for planning permission and to seek their decision.

RECOMMENDATION(S)

2. Development Control Committee is recommended, subject to referral to the Secretary of State:-

(a) To Resolve that:-

(01) The requirements of Part II of Schedule 4 of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 2011 (as amended) are satisfied by reason of the Environmental Statement and the Addendum, attached thereto including at least the following information:

(i) A description of the development comprising information on the site, design and size of the development; (ii) A description of the measures envisaged in order to avoid, reduce and, if possible, remedy significant adverse effects; (iii) The data required to identify and assess the main effects which the development is likely to have on the environment; (iv) An outline of the main alternatives studied by the applicant or appellant and an indication of the main reasons for the choice made, taking into account the environmental effects; (v) A non-technical summary of the information provided under paragraphs i) to iv) above.

(02) An Addendum Environmental Statement was submitted whose conclusions do not differ from those in the originally submitted Environmental Statement.

(03) That it be recorded that, in making the decision on the application, the Committee has taken into account the environmental information comprising the Environmental Statement and Addendum and that this information meets the minimum requirements of Part II of Schedule 4 to the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 2011 (as amended).

(b) Grant planning permission subject to:-

(i) The satisfactory completion of an agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to contain the following:

 Affordable Housing: 10% provision on site – (50% affordable intermediate to buy, and 50% affordable rent) and 10% (£21000 per unit) as a financial contribution  Phasing development plans.  Provision of public realm  Construction, employment and training initiatives/schemes;  The provision of Controlled Parking Zones (CPZ)  Financial contributions towards:

o Transport/Highways – contributions amounting to £2.1 million to be used as follows: . £700,000 St Marys Roundabout improvements . £300,000 Kimpton/ Windmill junction improvement . £400,000 Hucklesby/Hitchin Rod junction improvement . £100,000 Sustainable Transport contribution. . £300,000 Crawley Green Road/ Crescent Road junction contribution, . £300,000 Highways Improvements consisting including street lighting in the vicinity of Power Court

o Waste - £19500 towards waste infrastructure o Education – to be calculated upon the following formula:

. 2 bed dwelling – £5778.00 per dwelling . 3 bed dwelling – £11295.00 per dwelling . 4 bed dwelling – £19297.00 per dwelling;

To be used as follows:

The remodelling of the York street site external areas to provide playground space. The secondary contribution will be put towards the new Chiltern academy school at the Brache for offsite service provision of the new school.

 £2000 administration and monitoring fee  Railway signage – Contribution to be agreed towards pedestrian walkways and signage

(ii) To the refer the application to the Development Control Committee if a S106 Agreement to secure the Heads of Terms identified in (b)(i) of this report has not been satisfactorily completed by 30th April 2020 (or another date as agreed with the Development Control Manager) for the reason that the proposed development would not be accompanied by associated infrastructure improvements.

(c) Grant planning permission subject to the imposition of the following conditions:-

01) Details of Masterplan to be submitted and approved

02) Approval of Design Code to be submitted approved

03) Reserved Matters to be in general conformity with the Master Plan and Design Code - Submission of matters reserved for subsequent approval to be submitted within 3 years, must then commence any approval with 5 years of permission, or within 2 years of date of approval of last reserved matter.

04) Reserved Matters- Outline development shall not exceed amounts stated in application in terms of both floorspace and height.

05) Approval of details before commencement of each phase of development.

06) F03C (Plan numbers)

07) Development shall not exceed Parameter floor plans

08) Limitation of uses within Class D2 of the Use Classes Order

09) Hours of Use of the Stadium, ancillary uses and non-residential uses

10) Environmental Sustainability Plan

11) Hours of Construction

12) Construction Environmental Management Plan

13) Construction Logistics Plan

14) Noise Emissions

15) Deliveries

16) - 25) Environment Agency Conditions

26) Phased Contamination Condition

27) Water Supply Impact Study

28) Foul and Surface Water Arrangements

29) Sustainable Urban Drainage Scheme

30) Archaeological Investigation

31) Removal of Permitted Development rights re aerials and satellite dishes

32) Piling

33) Materials Samples

34) Samples of all materials to be used for the external surfaces of the concourse level floor(s)/ should be submitted at preliminary detailed design stage of this block and prior to any approval of reserved matters.

35) Secure by design

36) Landscaping

37) Stadium Management Plan

38) Tree protection of trees to be retained within site

39) Cycle Parking

40) Parking

41) Lighting Strategy

42) CCTV and Security Lighting

43) Refuse

44) Noise at neighbouring properties

45) Restriction on hours of operation of commercial uses

46) Travel Plan

47) Stadium and Major Event Conditions

48) Limit on number of matches played in a season

49) Stadium only for commercial football use and for no other commercial sport.

50) Spectator limit of 23,000

51) Hours of operation

52) Setdown and pickup for disabled people and transport

53) Full Accessibility Strategy

54) Parking to be in place before Stadium use commences

55) Vehicular and pedestrian access including to be complete prior to Stadium use

56) Framework Car Park Management Plan

57) Framework Travel Demand Management Strategy

58) Anti-terrorism strategy and features

59) Use of screens associated with any sound system

60) Details of amplified sound systems/public address system

61) Location of public address system

62) Hours of use of public address system

63) Full details of lighting including floodlighting

64) Hours of use of floodlighting

65) Location of floodlighting in relation to highway traffic

66) Plant machinery shall not exceed a certain level

67) Signage details and strategy

68) Section 278 Agreement

REPORT

Contents

Site and Surroundings – Paragraphs 3 – 10 Relevant History – 11 – 13 The Proposal – 14 – 15 Planning Policy Impact – 16 – 60 Consultation Responses – 61 – 119 Main Planning Considerations – 120 Principle of Development – 121 – 154 Delivery – 155 – 158 Environmental Statement – 159 – 219 Economic Impact – 220 – 229 Urban Design & Impact on Town Centre – 230 – 275 Archaeology – 276 – 277 Stadium Operations and Impact – 278 – 296 Traffic and Parking – 297 – 369 Construction Impacts – 370 – 374 Impact on Neighbours – 375 – 384 Other Environmental Matters – 385 – 431 Community Benefits – 432 – 438 Sustainable Design – 439 – 509 Accessibility – 510 – 513 Planning Obligations – 514 – 534 Third Party Representations – 536 – 537 Conclusions – 538 – 558

The Site and Surroundings

3. The application site comprises 8.55 hectares of brownfield land within Luton Town Centre. Historically, the site has been in industrial use and previously accommodated the River Lea Boiler Works and Electricity Works. The site was redeveloped in the 1970s for a mix of manufacturing and general industrial uses. The Site is now vacant and the buildings and structures, which previously occupied the site, have been demolished.

4. The site, on its north east boundary is bound by the Luton-Dunstable Busway and thence by the, main line rail. To the south east is Crawley Green Road, with St Mary’s Road to the south west and Church Street to the north-west. The Power Court road leads into the site from St Mary’s Road and Pondwicks Road leads into the site from Crawley Green Road. The Site is adjacent to the Main Shopping Area of Luton Town Centre, which is situated to the west.

5. Immediately to the south west of the application site is St. Mary’s Church, a Grade I listed building. The site is not within any of the town centre conservation areas, but it is situated adjacent to the eastern boundary of the Plaiters Lea Conservation Area. The next nearest conservation areas are the Town Centre (245m to the south-west), and High Town (300m to the north-west).

6. Power Court benefits from excellent accessibility in terms of its proximity to the main modal transport hub (formed by the guided bus, the bus interchange and the main train station) of the town, the University Campus and the eastern road route between the town centre and London Luton Airport. The site is located within the Town Centre Policy Area (Inset Map) as identified on the proposals of the Luton, as identified on the proposals map of the Luton Local Plan.

7. In the context of the site’s location, it is situated within a well-developed transport network, which provides direct and regular network rail services from Luton Rail Station (250 - 750m) to various London terminals, rail services to Gatwick Airport and the South, Bedford and Corby. The Luton- Dunstable Guided Busway, which bypasses town centre traffic to directly connect Luton Town Centre to Houghton Regis, Dunstable and Luton Airport, is less than a 10 minute walk from the site.

8. Turning now to the application site per se, the application site is flat, and has been used intensively for industrial purposes since the end of the nineteenth century. The location of the site adjacent railways has encouraged the development of industry which could be connected to railway network. The historic uses have included a power station, boiler & engineering works, fire station, coal depots, electricity generating station and engineering works

9. Whilst much of the application is vacant site, there are some buildings on the northwest and southwest corners of the site. Some of the site is used for car parking (to the north of the site). The balance of the site has been cleared of buildings, and there are residual access roads which continue to allow the site to be serviced, within the application site area. The site is a physically obvious self-contained entity, being defined by Church Street, Crawley Green Road and the Luton – Dunstable Busway/rail corridor

10. The Site is bisected by the River Lea, which has been progressively culverted, to facilitate the industrial development of the application site, to the extent that there is only a small portion on the eastern part of the site which is open.

Relevant Planning History

11. An application submitted by Railtrack Property in 1999 included part of Power Court in mixed use development for the “Gateway Project” which included for the redevelopment of Station Road to provide a new railway station and , bus station. The part Power Court element of the scheme was identified for a foodstore. A Committee resolution to approve the application in February 2001 was subject to the completion of a Section 106 agreement that failed to be completed (LPA ref: 99/0229/OUT refers).

12. In November 2005 an application for outline planning permission was submitted for a retail led development comprising 55,420 sq. metres retail floorspace, which also included residential, car parking and leisure/community facilities. (LPA ref. 05/01673/OUT refers) The application was not determined.

13. In addition to the foregoing, between 2010 and 2013, British Land also explored the option of the site’s redevelopment but no proposals came forward.

The Proposal

14. The application seeks outline planning permission, with all matters reserved, except for access, for a mixed use development comprising: a new football stadium (use class D2), with ancillary stadium-related facilities (including spectator and media facilities, conference rooms, catering facilities and commercial space); residential floor space (Use Class C3); flexible educational / community / commercial uses (Use Class D1/D2/B1(a)); hotel accommodation (Use Class C1); retail and food and drink (Use Class A1 - A5); a food store (Use Class A1) car and cycle parking; and associated access, highways, utilities, public realm, landscaping, river works and associated ancillary works and structures.

15. The application describes that the development would comprise the following development parameters:

 A community stadium with a capacity of up to 23,000, with ancillary stadium-related facilities;  Up to 550 residential units (use class C3), distributed across eight blocks;  An entertainment, music and conference venue (use class D2) of up to 2,700 sq. m;  Up to 2,800 sq. m of educational / community / commercial floorspace (use class D1 / B1(a));  Up to 2,600 sq. m of other entertainment (use class D1 / D2) floorspace;  Up to 12,000 sq. m of hotel accommodation (use class C1);  Up to 10,800 sq. m of retail and food and beverage floorspace (uses class A1 – A5);  A foodstore (use class A1) of up to 3,000 sq. m;  Up to 1,200 car parking spaces; and  Associated access, highways, utilities, public realm, landscaping, river works and other associated works and structures.

Planning Policy Implications

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

16. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published in July 2018. It sets out to rationalise national policy guidance and how the government’s planning policies are expected to be applied. However, this does not change the status of the development plan as the starting point for decision-making. Planning law requires that applications must be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The Framework is a material consideration in planning decisions.

17. So that sustainable development is pursued in a positive way, paragraph 11 of the NPPF sets out that plans and decisions should apply a presumption in favour of sustainable development. This means that decision takers should approve development proposals that accord with an up-to-date development plan, without delay. In a situation where there are no relevant development plan policies, or the policies which are most important are out of date, permission should be granted unless:

‘i) the application of policies in this Framework that protect areas or assets of particular importance provides a clear reason for refusing the development proposed; or ii) any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole.’ 18. Paragraph 38 of the Framework states that Local Planning Authorities should approach decision taking in a positive and creative way. The Framework encourages engagement with applicants to secure developments that will improve the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area. It concludes that ‘decision makers at every level should seek to approve applications for sustainable development where possible.’

19. Paragraph 47 states that planning law requires that applications for planning permission be determined in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

20. Paragraph 64 requires that for major development involving provision of housing, ‘planning policies and decisions should expect at least 10% of the homes to be available for affordable home ownership, unless this would exceed the level of affordable housing required in the area, or significantly prejudice the ability to meet the identified affordable housing needs of specific groups.’

21. In paragraph 85, the Framework states that planning policies and decisions should support the role that town centres play at the heart of local communities by ‘taking a positive approach to their growth, management and adaptation’.

22. Paragraph 91 of the Framework encourages planning policies and decisions to achieve ‘healthy, inclusive and safe places’. These places should promote social interaction, be safe and accessible and enable and support healthy lifestyles.

23. Paragraph 92 builds on this point further, requiring Local Planning authorities to ‘plan positively for the provision and use of shared spaces, community facilities and other local services, to enhance the sustainability of communities and residential environments’.

24. Paragraph d) continues that Local Planning Authorities should ensure that established shops, facilities and services are able to develop and modernise, and are retained for the benefit of the community and that an integrated approach is used when considering the location of housing, economic uses and community facilities and services.

25. Chapter 9 of the Framework positively promotes sustainable transport. Paragraph 103 requires that the planning system actively manages patterns of growth and ensures that significant development should be focused on locations, which are or can be made sustainable, through limiting the need to travel and offering a genuine choice of transport modes.

26. Paragraph 109 advises that development should only be refused on highway grounds if it poses an unacceptable impact on highway safety or the residual cumulative impacts on the road network would be severe.

27. Paragraph 110 continues that development should give priority first to pedestrian and cycle movements, and second to facilitating access to high quality public transport. Layouts of development should maximise the catchment area for bus or other public transport services, and appropriate facilities that encourage public transport use.

28. Paragraph 117 explains that planning policies and decisions should promote the effective use of land in meeting the need for homes and other uses, whilst safeguarding and improving the environment and ensuring safe and healthy living conditions.

29. Paragraph 118 states that planning policies and decisions should give substantial weight to the value of using suitable brownfield land within settlements for homes and other identified needs, and support appropriate opportunities to remediate land otherwise unsuitable for development.

30. Paragraph 121 states that Local Planning Authorities should also take a positive approach to applications for alternative uses of land, which is currently developed but not allocated for a specific purpose in plans, where this would help meet identified development needs. In particular, they should support proposals to “use retail and employment land for homes in areas of high housing demand, provided this would not undermine key economic sectors or sites or the vitality and viability of town centres, and would be compatible with other policies in this Framework; and make more effective use of sites that provide community services such as schools and hospitals, provided this maintains or improves the quality of service provision and access to open space.”

31. Paragraph 195 states that where a development will lead to substantial harm to a designated heritage asset, consent should be refused, unless it can be demonstrated that the substantial harm is necessary to achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh the harm or loss.

32. Paragraph 196 states that where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal including, where appropriate, securing its optimum viable use.

National Planning Practice Guidance

33. The NPPG amplifies the Policy topics raised in the NPPF

Luton Local Plan 2011-2031

34. The site is allocated as a Category B Employment Area in the Adopted Local Plan. The relevant policies of the Adopted Local Plan, are as follows, LLP1, LLP2, LLP3, LLP9, LLP13, LLP15, LLP16, LLP21, LLP22, LLP24, LP25, LLP27, LLP28, LLP29, LLP30, LLP31, LLP32, LLP36, LLP37, LLP38 and LLP39 and LLP40,

35. Policy LLP1 sets out that a ‘presumption in favour of sustainable development’ will be applied to development management decisions. Criteria A of the policy explains that planning permission will be granted where applications accord with Local Plan policies when taken as a whole, unless other material considerations indicate otherwise.

36. Policy LLP2 sets out the Spatial Development Strategy for the Borough Identifying that “There is a need for 17,800 net additional dwellings to support the population growth of Luton Borough over the period 2011 – 2031. Over the same period there is a need for 31,800 net additional dwellings in the Functional Luton Housing Market Area (which includes the need for 17,800 dwellings in Luton Borough).” The Local Plan states in Policy LLP2 that provision will be made for 8,500 net additional dwellings over the plan period in the Borough and requires 20% of all qualifying housing developments under Policy LLP16 (Affordable Housing) to be affordable dwellings.

37. Policy LLP2B states that \employment in B Class uses will be delivered through 69 hectares of employment development on Strategic Allocations at Land South of Stockwood Park, London Luton, Airport, Butterfield Technology Park, Power Court, Napier Park, High Town and the Creative Quarter;

38. Policy LLP2C states that “Town Centre and Retail uses will be directed in accordance with the Centre Hierarchy (Policy LLP21) reinforcing and enhancing the vitality, viability and regeneration of Luton Town Centre as a regional centre** and the network of 6 District Centres and 12*** Neighbourhood Centres serving the Borough. The Town Centre, District and Neighbourhood network will be a focus for future investment provision including transport access and linkages, community facilities, opportunities for shared services as well as appropriate scale housing, retail and employment development.

39. Policy LLP2E states that the natural environment, historic environment and heritage assets of the borough will be protected and enhanced as set out in Policies LLP27, LLP28, LLP29, and LLP30 in the Local Plan….”

40. Policy LLP3 sets out the “Luton Town Centre Strategy”. Identifying specifically in the narrative (paragraph 4.33) the two strategic allocations which are contained within the Town Centre, namely Power Court LLP9 and the Creative Quarter LLP11. The policy seeks to provide circa 3,400 sq. net convenience retail floorspace in the current period and provide circa 4,420 sq. of non-bulky comparison goods for the period to 2020 and 30,096 sq. by 2025, hotels, and leisure uses to maintain and enhance the retail regional* role of the town centre; The policy is predicated by the premise that “Luton Town Centre will be a location for positive change and will be a focus for economic and residential growth and an improved natural and built environment. Building on the town’s rich heritage this mixed use area will provide a balanced offer of high quality residential development, offices and studios, creative industries, independent and national retail, education institutions and thriving public spaces with a vibrant café culture and night time economy.”

41. Policy LLP9 sets out the policy framework for the allocated site Power Court. The policy includes Land at Power Court, as shown on the Policies Map is allocated for town centre uses in a mixed use redevelopment. Any scheme should include around 600 dwellings and a need for circa 3,393 sq. m net retail convenience floorspace. The site could provide for a proportion of the borough’s overall identified need for comparison floorspace within the town centre.

42. Policy LLP13A sets out the fundamental policy guidance on the Plan’s Economic Strategy, and states that “, Planning applications will be granted where they deliver sustainable economic growth and prosperity to serve the needs of Luton and the wider sub region”. LLP13E states; “Planning permission for proposals that would increase and improve tourism and visitor attractions will be granted provided that it does not cause an adverse impact on the road network, any town centre use accords with the sequential approach and is in conformity with the policies in the Local Plan.”

43. Policy LLP15 recognises that there is a need to provide 8,500 dwellings in the Borough to meet the housing needs of the Borough and the Luton Housing Market Area. LLP15B states that “Planning permission for residential development will also be granted on sites not allocated for housing provided that it would not lead to a loss of other uses for which there is a recognised local need.” The Policy concludes by stating that “Higher densities will be encouraged within Luton Town Centre and the district and neighbourhood centres. New housing should not result in over- intensification of the site. Development will achieve a mix of different housing sizes, types and tenures informed by the latest housing market assessments and local circumstances.”

44. Policy LLP16 addresses the matter of affordable housing and identifies the acute need for affordable housing within the Borough, identifying a need of 7200 dwellings. The said policy is designed to deliver around 1700 affordable dwellings. LLP16A sets out that “The Council will require the provision of 20% affordable housing units on developments that deliver a net gain of at least 11 dwellings and on sites of 10 dwellings or less which have a combined floorspace of more than 1.000 sq. m”. LLP16C requires that proposals should ensure that the size, type and tenure of affordable housing is consistent with housing needs of the area. LLP16D provides an option to consider viability either as a proportionate reduction in numbers or as a commuted sum.

45. Policy LLP21 – Centre Hierarchy, identifies, specifically, a 3 tier structure, comprising Town Centre, District Centre and Neighbourhood Centre. The application site is situated in the Town Centre (Luton Town Centre). The Policy in this respect states that “Proposals for main town centre uses will address the identified scale of retail need over the plan period, distributed at a scale appropriate to the centre hierarchy functions, and the allocated Power Court and Northern Gateway retail developments.” The basis of the Policy is that “Main Town Centre Uses” defined in the NPPF, as follows: “Retail development (including warehouse clubs and factory outlet centres); leisure, entertainment and more intensive sport and recreation uses (including cinemas, restaurants, drive-through restaurants, bars and pubs, nightclubs, casinos, health and fitness centres, indoor bowling centres and bingo halls); offices; and arts, culture and tourism development (including theatres, museums, galleries and concert halls, hotels and conference facilities).” Should be located in a hierarchy of locations starting in the Town Centre. The policy states that for all retail ('A' use classes) the extent of Luton town centre comprises the town centre shopping area, while the extent of centre uses, the extent of a centre is the wider boundary as marked on the policies map

46. Policy LLP24 Deals with education and other community facilities. The underlying concern is that there are limited opportunities to accommodate new facilities. In particular LLP24B refers, inter alia, to “New and extended education childcare, nursery and other community facilities”. The policy continues that such facilities will be granted planning permission provided that a demonstrable local or regional need is established, and the facility is well related to the area it serves; there would be no unacceptable effect on the amenity of any surrounding residential dwellings and other uses; it does not take land either in or allocated for other uses, unless it is demonstrated that the need for the facility outweighs that for the existing or allocated use.

47. The Glossary to the Local Plan at Appendix 1 defines community facilities in the following terms; “Public, private and third sector provision facilities (including those within educational establishments with shared use and public access) that provide for the health and well-being, social, educational, spiritual, recreational, leisure and cultural needs of the community. Most D1 (non-residential institutions) and D2 (assembly and leisure) uses fall within this definition. Some uses may qualify where they function as a community hub, such as a pub that supports teams in sports leagues. B (employment) and C (residential) use classes are not considered to be community facilities.”

48. Policy LLP25 addresses the matter of “High Quality Design”. The policy requires that both buildings and spaces will be of a high quality design and distinctive character and be safe and easily accessed by all members of the community. Proposals will need to demonstrate adherence to the best practice principles of urban design to create quality places in the Borough. The policy sets out a number of criteria, which essentially seek to enhance the distinctiveness and character of the area diversity, create or enhance attractive safe, accessible and active open public spaces, creatively using hard and soft landscaping, optimise and improve accessibility to walking and cycling and connections to public transport. Additionally, the use of land should be maximised, by providing sustainable development

49. Policy LLP27 encourages the establishing of new Green Infrastructure within the Borough as well as the retention and safeguarding of existing Green space. The policy continues that where there is a shortfall of open space to meet the needs of occupants of new housing development, proposals which generate demand for new or enhance open space and Green Infrastructure will be supported. Such support would be on the basis that such provision is in accordance with the open space standards.

50. Policy LLP28 considers biodiversity and nature conservation, and requires that development proposals that impact adversely on statutory or other designated sites, and ecological networks, will need to demonstrate that they have complied with sequential criteria which seeks to ensure that where necessary, avoidance, the benefits of the proposal outweigh the intrinsic nature conservation interest, mitigation and compensation through acquisition and management of an alternative habitat of equivalent wildlife value in the vicinity. Criteria D of the policy explains that where there is a reasonable likelihood of a development proposal having an adverse effect of habitats or species of biodiversity interest an ecological assessment will be required.

51. Policy LLP29 addresses Landscape and Geological Conservation. The Policy is underpinned by the premises that “Development proposals will be supported where they protect, conserve or enhance the character, setting and natural beauty of national and local landscape areas.” There are three Tiers in the hierarchy, most immediately the Hart Hill Area of Local Landscape Value (ALLV).

52. Policy LLP30 seeks to protect, conserve and enhance Luton’s unique and rich heritage, identity and sense of place. On this basis development proposals should take account of the character, setting, local distinctiveness (including materials and detailing) of local affected heritage assets and features of particular importance including the Borough’s local distinctiveness in so far as the presence of intrinsic materials, and particularly the character and setting of the Grade I Listed Church of St Marys. In the consideration of such applications the Policy requires any degree of harm and benefit arising from development proposals will be assessed against the significance of any affected heritage assets including both Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas, as well as non-designated heritage assets. The Policy continues that “Any harm or loss to a heritage asset requires clear and convincing justification. Substantial harm to or loss of a designated heritage asset should be exceptional or wholly exceptional depending on the significance of the affected heritage assets. It will only be permitted where there are substantial public benefits that outweigh the harm or loss.

53. Policy LLP31 addresses the matter of Sustainable Transport Strategy. “The strategy for sustainable transport in Luton is based on the vision for the Local Transport Plan 2011-2026 which is to ensure that an integrated, safe, accessible and more sustainable transport system supports the economic regeneration and prosperity of the town.” Under category A, there are a number of criteria which the Council will work with, including, inter alia, developers to ensure the delivery of reduced congestion around the town centre (i.), there are sustainable connections via the Luton Dunstable busway serving the conurbation (ii), improved accessibility and connectivity for a more pedestrian friendly town centre environment for all users; (iii), controlled parking within the town centre to support sustainable development (iv).

54. Policy LLP32 deals with parking, and requires that “Parking provision in Luton will be managed to ensure that a proportionate number of spaces are available to support the growth of the town centre.

55. The overarching policy objective of Policy LLP36 is to encourage development to reduce the overall flood risk, through design and layout of schemes, which replace flood plan and enhance natural forms of drainage. To achieve this, section A of policy LLP36 directs development to areas with the lowest probability of flooding. It continues to say that development must also address flooding resilience with effective management of flood risk and it must be ensured that development does not increase the risk of flooding elsewhere, including cumulative impact on adjoining and surrounding land and in the wider catchment. The policy also states that development must provide wider environmental benefits in relation to flood risk and contribute towards delivering ‘good ecological statuses.

56. Policy LLP37 addresses the issue of climate change, carbon and waste reduction and sustainable energy. It states that the Council will support development proposals, which contribute towards mitigation, and adaptation to climate change through energy use reduction and efficient and renewable and decentralised energy.

57. Residential development will be encouraged to exceed the national standards set out in Building Regulations on carbon and energy performance and non-residential development over 1000 square metres will be required to achieve the 2013 BREEAM ‘Good’ status. Concerning waste, the policy states that proposals which are likely to generate significant volumes of waste, through development or operational phases, will be required to include a waste audit as part of the application.

58. Policy LLP38 covers the issue of pollution and contamination. The policy requires that an assessment of the impact of development is carried out, to ensure that it will not result in any significantly adverse effects with regard to air, land or water on neighbouring development, adjoining land or the wider environment. If adverse impacts are identified, then appropriate mitigation will be required.

59. Policy LLP39 sets out the expectation of the Local Planning Authority regarding infrastructure and developer contributions to support development. The policy states that proposals should provide or adequately contribute towards the infrastructure and services needed to support them.

60. Policy LLP40 was added to the policies set out in the draft Local Plan as part of the Inspector’s recommendations. The debate which took place as part of the EIP, focussed, inter alia, on the use of Power Court, in particular the use of the site for a football stadium. The Inspector concluded that there was insufficient information available at that time to allow the allocation land at Power Court to be allocated for a football stadium per se. Accordingly Policy LLP40 allows for a review of the Adopted Local Plan to include a number of issues, but particularly; “(vi) Provision for the relocation of Luton Town Football Club; (vii) Retail needs of the Borough and how they will be provided for. (viii) Strategy and policies for the town centre; (ix) Uses and policies relating to the strategic allocation at Power Court (Policy LLP9).

Summary of Consultation Responses

61. Highway Development Manager – No objections subject to Section 38/278 Agreement works, and to the agreement to the detailed design of the offsite highway works.

62. Local Lead Flood Authority – No objections subject to conditions.

63. Strategic Planning - The proposed development could be considered to be a departure from the development plan. Whilst Policy LLP9 allocates the site for a mix of uses, including housing, retail, leisure, cultural and entertainment and B1, it does not refer to a sports stadium. The application would bring back into use an underused, partly derelict site, providing community and sport facilities. The principle of this sport use is appropriate in a central location where it is able to draw on good public transport links which is in line with Objective 9 of the Luton Local Plan. The scale of the stadium and implications for access need consideration in line with policies LLP31 and LLP32.

Policies LLP3, LLP9 and LLP21 show a significant need for new comparison retail, most of which should be met within the town centre. Power Court is a key site identified for retail and if significant volumes of comparison retail cannot be delivered in this location it would represent a departure from the development plan. It is essential that the development integrates harmoniously with the town centre, with the mix of uses appropriately controlled. When considering design great weight should be given to the impact of the setting of local conservation areas (Plaiters Lea and the Town Centre), St. Mary’s Church and the Hart Hill area of local landscape value.

64. LBC Strategic Planning (Ecology/Biodiversity) – Any comments received will be reported at the Meeting

65. LBC Strategic Planning (Heritage) –

“BEAMS [BEAMS are the external consultants who provide the Council with advice on Heritage matters] has previously provided advice on the proposed development at Power Court. The outline application plans do not look to have changed much since submission, these comments are based on the Parameter Plans you emailed.

As previously advised the development site is to the east / north-east of the Grade I listed Church of St Mary Church and not far from the west boundary of the Plaiters Lea Conservation Area, both are designated heritage assets.

The church of St Mary is grade I listed and therefore of the highest level of significance in listing terms. It is a large church, with 12th century origins, 14th / 15th century additions and was much restored by G E Street in the late 19th century. The church is surrounded on all sides by a good sized, verdant churchyard which contains some tombs, trees and shrubs, the churchyard is largely enclosed by trees to the south, east and west - the churchyard provides an attractive setting to St Mary's Church.

Beyond the churchyard the setting is more modern and the dual carriageway to the east (which divides the churchyard from the Power Court site) being a particularly intrusive element in relation to the setting of the church.

The proposed development site comprises a large area on the east side of St Mary's Road. The development would consist of a football stadium; whilst efforts have been made to reduce its height on its western side (closest to the church) the scale and volume of the stadium as a whole is considered to affect a radical change to the area and be overwhelming in terms of its relationship / setting with St Mary's Church.

To the north of the stadium there is proposed to be residential development in a series of blocks (6 in all), sited above a car park and retail units. The views towards this development site from the Plaiters Lea Conservation Area (Guildford Street) currently allow views of the wooded hills beyond, these views would be significantly reduced and tall residential blocks and associated development would dominate; potentially causing some harm to the setting of the Conservation Area.

The National Planning Policy Framework (2018) requires Local Authorities to take account of 'the desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets' and 'the desirability of new development making a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness' (para. 185).

In accordance with para. 189 a Heritage Statement has been submitted as part of this application, however BEAMS do not agree with its findings that the development will not impact upon the setting and therefore cause no harm to the significance of St Mary's Church or the Plaiters Lea Conservation Area.

Paragraph 194 of the NPPF states that “ Any harm to, or loss of, the significance of a designated heritage asset (from its alteration or destruction, or from development with its setting) should require clear and convincing justification.”

BEAMS considers that, having viewed the information submitted, the proposed development will result in 'less than substantial harm' (NPPF, para. 196) to the setting of St Mary's Church and also to the setting of the Plaiters Lea Conservation Area. The NPPF states that 'Where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal..'

It is appreciated that the development proposes a number of public realm improvements including potentially reducing St Mary's Road to single lanes and the uncovering of the River Lea (now culverted), to run alongside the road. Whilst these would be welcomed they would not necessarily overcome the harm identified.

It is noted that the level of harm to the setting of St Mary's Church will vary according to the season, time of day, numbers using the stadium site and various other factors.

Ideally opportunities to improve the design and scale of the Power Court scheme and therefore reduce its visual impact should be worked towards. Visually Accurate Representations (VAR) would be very helpful in understanding the impact of the development.

The plans put forward within the outline application are considered to harm the setting of the Grade I listed St Marys Church and the Plaiters Lea Conservation Area however the level of harm identified is 'less than substantial'. BEAMS advises that Luton Borough Council, as decision maker, should weigh the harm identified against the public benefits of the proposal.”

66. LBC Environmental Protection -

Noise: No objections to conditions. However the Applicant is to be advised that he noise assessment has not adequately addressed the impact of noise and vibration from the proposed music venue, on nearby noise and vibration sensitive receptors. Further information should be provided by the applicant.

Building services Plant: The applicant must ensure that noise emitted by all building services plant operating together does not exceed -10dBA below the existing lowest LA90 back ground noise level. Where the noise source has a tonal spectrum it shall be -15dBA. Noise emitted shall be measured or predicted at 1.0m from the nearest residential window or at 1.2m above any adjacent residential garden, terrace, patio or balcony at any time when the units are operating. The plant shall be serviced regularly in accordance with manufacturer's instructions to ensure that the requirements of the condition are maintained.

Vibration: The proposed development is close to a railway line and station. The applicant should be requested to submit an assessment that addresses the impact of vibration on the proposed development and demonstrate compliance with BS 6472-1:2008 Guide to evaluation of human exposure to vibration in buildings, including any proposed mitigation methods.

Contaminated Land: The phase 1 report indicates contamination is or may be present. A Phase 2 intrusive soil investigation should be undertaken and submitted. The method and extent of the investigation should be agreed with the local planning authority in consultation with the Environment Agency and the Council's Environmental Health Service beforehand. The investigation should be undertaken prior to the commencement of the development.

Construction Management Plan: The applicant should be requested to provide a Construction Management Plan that addresses how any impacts associated with the proposed works will be mitigated. It should give details of measures be taken to minimise the impact of their demolition and construction work on the surrounding community, both for the construction on site and the transport arrangements for servicing the site. The applicant should demonstrate compliance with BS 5228: Noise and vibration on construction and open sites.

Proposed Uses: Details of proposed A3/A5 use have not been supplied at this stage of the application. Where A3/A5 use is proposed at a later stage, details regarding the ventilation system must be submitted and approved by the Local Authority, prior to the commencement of any cooking.

External lighting: No objection subject to a condition. . 67. LBC Environmental Protection (Air Quality) - The applicant to provide an Air Quality Assessment produced in accordance with the latest guidance

The assessment shall include modelling of expected pollutant concentrations on the application site, at the year the development is likely to become operational, and an appropriate future date. The model shall be verified against the latest monitoring results produced by Luton Borough Council, or another source as agreed in writing by the Council.

Where the assessment indicates that levels of pollutants exceed their respective Air Quality Objectives, the developer shall consider alterations to the location of residential units within the site, size or layout of the development in order to remove relevant receptors from locations of elevated exposure. The proposals shall be detailed in the assessment.

68. LBC Fixed Assets – Any comments received will be reported at the Meeting

69. LBC Housing Policy – Any comments received will be reported at the Meeting

70. LBC Education - The application requires a contribution of £5778.00 per 2- bedroom dwelling, £11295.00 per 3-bedroom dwelling and £19297.00 per 4 bedrooms and above dwellings.

The development is in an area of Luton that is experiencing an increasing shortage of School places. The local schools are oversubscribed and have waiting lists in most year groups. This development will yield approximately 284.96 primary children and 63.02 secondary aged children which will add to the increasing burden of sourcing school places. The primary contribution towards remodelling of the York street site external areas to provide playground space. The secondary contribution will be put towards the new Chiltern academy school at the Brache for offsite service provision of the new school. The council is expected to use S106 money from development such as these to pay for the additional school places that will be required.

71. LBC Libraries - £30,000 contribution sought towards Bury Park Library project which includes increased space and relocation of the library at the front to accommodate increased demand.

72. LBC Waste Management – No Objections subject to contribution of £19,500.00.

73. LBC Parks – Any comments received will be reported at the Meeting

74. LBC Parks (Trees) – Any comments received will be reported at the Meeting

75. LBC Public Health – Any comments received will be reported at the Meeting

76. LBC Building Control – Any comments received will be reported at the Meeting

77. LBC Luton Investment Framework - Support the application. Plans for Power Court bring forward development options on a strategic site that has been derelict in the town centre for a considerable time.

78. LBC Economic Development Team – Any comments received will be reported at the Meeting

79. Central Beds Council - In the original response from Central Beds Council it was advised that consideration should be given to testing the proposal, along with other planning development and strategic growth scenarios, against the Central Bedfordshire and Luton Strategic Transport Model. The latest TA refers to this modelling and notes that it shall be undertaken once the outputs are available, this is welcomed. Appropriate measures should be put in place to avoid any uncontrolled overspill parking within Central Bedfordshire.

80. Central Beds Council (Archaeology) – No objections subject to conditions.

81. North Herts District Council – Any comments received will be reported at the Meeting

82. Houghton Regis Development Corporation – Objection, development contrary to the principles of the Development Plan.

83. Herts County Council - No objection subject to conditions.

84. Dacorum Borough Council – Any comments received will be reported at the Meeting

85. St Albans City Council – Any comments received will be reported at the Meeting

86. Bedford Borough Council - No objection

87. Caddington Parish Council – Any comments received will be reported at the Meeting

88. Slip End Parish Council – Any comments received will be reported at the Meeting

89. London Luton Airport (Safeguarding) – (LLAOL Airfield Operations Safeguarding) - The proposed development has been examined from an aerodrome safeguarding aspect and whilst it does not conflict with the safeguarding criteria relating to the Obstacle Limitation Surfaces we would request that the developer considers the following regarding the proposed Lighting plans. As the development is close to the approach to the runway there is a need to carefully design any external lighting schemes so that there is no light spill above the horizontal and that they avoid causing any distraction to pilots.

90. Highways England - No objection subject to the following conditions:

- Prior to first occupation the Framework Stadium Travel Demand Management Strategy prepared by PBA supporting the application dated August 2016 is to be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in conjunction with the Highways England and carried out in accordance with the document thereafter. - Prior to first occupation the Framework Stadium Travel Demand Management Strategy is to be reviewed by the planning authority in consultation with Highways England to take on board conditions prevailing at the time and adjustments made to accommodate them.

91. Network Rail - Network Rail has no objection in principle to the development, but there are some requirements which must be met, especially with the close proximity to the development of an electrified railway. Given the size and proximity of the development in relation to the railway it is considered that there may be significant impacts on Luton railway station. It is therefore appropriate that a contribution is sought from the developer towards station facility improvements.

Drainage: All surface and foul water arising from the proposed works must be collected and diverted away from Network Rail property. In the absence of detailed plans all soakaways must be located so as to discharge away from the railway infrastructure.

Lighting: Where new lighting is to be erected adjacent to the operational railway the potential for train drivers to be dazzled must be eliminated. In addition, the location and colour of lights must not give rise to the potential for confusion with the signalling arrangements on the railway. Detail of any external lighting should be provided as a condition if not already indicated on the application.

Consideration should be given to additional signage and wayfinding throughout Luton railway station and between the station and new stadium. This would assist passengers arriving on match days and help with potential overcrowding in the station.

92. National Grid - Due to the presence of Cadent and/or National Grid apparatus in proximity to the specified area, the contractor should contact Plant Protection before any works are carried out to ensure the apparatus is not affected by any of the proposed works.

93. First Capital Connect – Any comments received will be reported at the Meeting

94. Arriva (Bus Operator) – Any comments received will be reported at the Meeting

95. Grant Palmer (Bus Operator) – Any comments received will be reported at the Meeting

96. Centrebus (Bus Operator) – Any comments received will be reported at the Meeting

97. Historic England –

20 October 2016 –

“The Impact of the Proposals on the Historic Environment The Church of St. Mary

The scale of the development would result in harm to the setting and significance of the church. The football stadium is positioned at the centre of the site, opposite the church. By its nature a football stadium is an extremely large building. We note that efforts have been made to reduce the impact of the development on the church by utilising a four stand scheme and by making the west stand the lower stand. However, the footprint and mass of the stadium greatly exceeds that of the church and the height of the west stand sits only marginally below the top of the tower. The east stand is taller still and the entire stadium is surmounted by the ‘halo’ lighting rig. The residential blocks are all taller than the stadium. The height of the new development in relation to the church is illustrated in the cross section drawings. The development is set on a podium which is meant to decrease the perception of massing on the site. However, it is not clear what impact this raised ground level would have on the surrounding townscape and whether this in itself would separate rather than integrate the new development.

The site currently does not make a particular contribution to the significance of the church beyond the potential its vacant nature allows for views of the building and the space it provides to appreciate it. However, the scale of the new development would be harmful. It would dominate the church which has traditionally been a landmark building, the architecture and function making it an important building for the surrounding area. While its role as an architectural landmark has largely been lost due to the scale of modern development, the re-development of the Power Court site offers the potential to enhance the significance of the church by sensitively responding to the building. The cumulative impact of the existing tall buildings surrounding the church and a development of the scale proposed would be considerable.

The design of the stadium would have an effect on the setting and significance of the building. The outline nature of the application means the detailed design cannot be assessed at this stage. The indicative illustration of the stadium shows a grid framework to the façade with, what appears to be, a high proportion of glazing. A well designed, high quality and active façade could help to enhance the setting of the building. Similarly, if the stadium could successfully incorporate a number of other uses and function on the 24/7 basis described, a positive use of the surroundings of the church could also provide an opportunity to moderate its impact.

The public realm would be critical in helping to integrate the proposed development with the surrounding townscape and the church. Again, the outline nature of the application makes it difficult to assess how well the scheme would achieve this. The proposal to reduce St. Mary’s Road from 4 lanes to 2 would be a positive improvement. The de-culverting of the River Lea would also be an enhancement. However, the public space, Vicarage Terrace, appears to respond to the stadium rather than to the church and stadium. The River Lea would flow at a lower level from the churchyard and it is not clear it would be visible from the surroundings of the church as it would presumably be behind a balustrade. On the stadium side the land is terraced down to the river. We wonder if there is scope to relate the river to the townscape to the west as well as the proposed development to the east. We also consider the scheme could go further to create a great new civic space by removing the traffic completely from St. Mary’s Road or creating a shared space for pedestrians and vehicles. The current scheme therefore offers some enhancement through improvements to the setting of the church but could go much further to integrating the development with the church and townscape by responding to the local character and history to create a strong sense of place.

Plaiter’s Lea Conservation Area

The scale of the proposed development and particularly the tall residential blocks would also result in harm to the conservation area. The views eastwards from Guildford Street and John Street to Hart Hill provide visual interest and a pleasing contrast to the urban character of the conservation area. The Viewpoint Assessment notes that the development would result in the loss of outlook onto the tree covered backdrop of Hart Hill. The setting of the conservation area is dominated by the monolithic structure of the mall which forms a wall to the southern side. The height and length of the mall also isolates the conservation area from the townscape beyond. To the north the conservation area is bounded by the railway line. The redevelopment of the Power Court site offers the opportunity to knit the conservation area into the wider townscape. The scale of the proposed blocks is much greater that the scale of the historic buildings in the conservation area and the grain above the podium much looser. It therefore does not integrate the new development with the built and historic environment but presents a contrast to it.

The scheme is designed so the west access is through a public space, Pondwick Steps that comprises a stepped and treed quadrant. Again the outline nature of the application makes it hard to assess the quality of the proposed public realm and how successfully it would relate to the conservation area. Pub and retail use is proposed beneath the podium here and again how this is signed or appears at street level is unclear. Consideration should also be given to St. Mary’s Road. While the public realm might draw people into the development, the plans show a wide road and several traffic islands and roundabouts which are likely to work against the integration of the two parts of the town.

Legislative and Policy Context

There is a statutory requirement to have special regard to the desirability of preserving a listed building, its setting and any features of special interest (ss. 16, 62 The Planning Act, 1990). There is also a statutory requirement to pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of a conservation area (s 72 The Planning Act, 1990). The National Planning Policy Framework builds on this and the historic environment section sets out the desirability of preserving and enhancing heritage assets (paragraph 131). It makes it clear that the significance of heritage assets can be harmed by development in their setting (paragraph 132). Local authorities are asked to look for opportunities for new development in conservation areas and the setting of heritage assets to enhance or better reveal their significance (paragraph 137). It defines setting as the surroundings in which the heritage asset is experienced. There is further advice on setting in our Practice Advice Note 3.

Under the NPPF it is a core planning principle to conserve heritage assets in a manner appropriate to their significance so that they can be enjoyed for their contribution to the quality of life for this and future generations, (paragraph 17). When considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. No other planning concern is given a greater sense of importance in the NPPF. The more important the asset, the greater the weight should be. As heritage assets are irreplaceable, any harm or loss should require clear and convincing justification, (paragraph 132).

Your authority should also aim to achieve sustainable development, seeking economic, social and environmental gains jointly and simultaneously through the planning system, (paragraph 8). Pursuing sustainable development involves seeking positive improvements in the quality of the built, natural and historic environment, (paragraph 9). Your authority should therefore seek to improve the proposals so that they avoid or minimise harm to the significance of designated heritage assets.

The NPPF directs local authorities to look for opportunities for new development within conservation areas and the setting of heritage assets to enhance or better reveal their significance, (paragraph 137). In the section, Requiring Good Design, (paragraph 58), planning decisions should aim to ensure that developments: will function well and add to the overall quality of the area; establish a strong sense of place, using streetscapes and buildings to create attractive and comfortable places; respond to local character and history, and reflect the identity of local surroundings and materials; and be visually attractive as a result of good architecture and appropriate landscaping. It states that planning decisions should address the connections between people and places and the integration of new development into the built and historic environment, (paragraph 61).

If a proposal cannot be amended to avoid all harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, and would result in “less than substantial harm”, in the language of the Framework, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposals, (paragraph 134). Permission should not be refused because of concerns about incompatibility of development with an existing townscape if those concerns have been mitigated by good design, unless the concern relates to a designated heritage asset and the impact would cause material harm to the asset or its setting which is not outweighed by the proposal’s economic, social and environmental gains, (paragraph 65).

The Planning Advice Note 3, The Setting of Heritage Assets, discusses cumulative change and notes that where the significance of a heritage asset has been compromised in the past by unsympathetic development affecting its setting, to accord with the NPPF policies, consideration still needs to be given to whether additional change will further detract from or can enhance, the significance of the asset. It notes that setting in urban areas means that protection and enhancement of setting is intimately linked to townscape and urban design considerations (section 9).

The Luton Local Plan is currently at examination stage and therefore carries considerable weight. The draft Pre-Submission Local Plan (2015) identifies an edge of town site, known as land south of Stockwood Park/Newlands, for a new football ground, policy LP5. The draft Plan’s main objective for Power Court is ‘to maximise the redevelopment opportunity of the site and its important location through the delivery of a mix of uses and in a form that complements the historic town centre and makes the site and integral part of it.’ Policy LP9 requires the proposals to have a comprehensive master plan; the development to respect and enhance the setting and context of the site in terms of using quality design to complement adjacent landmark buildings and the public realm, including St. Mary’s church and grounds and to make more use of the River Lea. The policy also seeks to ensure that development elevations maintain the high visual profile of the site and maintain views to other adjacent vistas in the town, e.g. Hart Hill and the railway line. Power Court will be considered at stage 3 of the Examination in Public in January 2017. Given the advanced stage of the Plan preparation process and the advice in the Planning Practice Guidance, your authority should consider whether it is appropriate to determine the application in advance of this.

Historic England’s Position

Historic England are keen to see the appropriate redevelopment of the Power Court site. We recognise the potential this large town centre site has for the regeneration of Luton. We also acknowledge that the derelict nature of the site has a negative impact on the setting of the Church of St. Mary and the Plaiter’s Lea Conservation Area.

The proposal to construct a football stadium on the site would, by virtue of its scale, dominate the adjacent church. The cumulative impact of this and the other modern, large buildings on the setting and significance of the church would be considerable. This would result in a harm to the significance of Luton’s only grade I listed building. The scale of the residential blocks would contrast with the scale of the historic townscape in the conservation area. This calls into question how successfully the development integrates with the existing townscape. Again, the cumulative impact of the Mall and another development of a substantial scale on the conservation area would be considerable. The loss of the views to Hart Hill would also be harmful.

The application puts forward a number of public benefits that it considers the scheme would deliver. These include benefits associated with a town centre location for the football club and with the role of stadia in regeneration. Other benefits it puts forward are linked to the concept of it being a community stadium. It is for your authority to assess these public benefits.

We acknowledge there would also be benefits associated with the provision of housing on the site. However, if the site was not required to accommodate the stadium in addition to the housing, this would allow for the housing to be redesigned to respond in a more human scale to the historic townscape of Plaiter’s Lea and the Church of St. Mary.

The NPPF reminds us that heritage assets are irreplaceable. As such your authority should consider first whether there is clear and convincing justification for the harm. If it is satisfied that this is the case, your authority should weigh the harm against the public benefits of the proposal.

If your authority is minded to accept the public benefits of the development, it should seek to ensure the design of the scheme, its use and the public realm provide a high quality environment that integrates the new development with the surrounding townscape and historic church. We acknowledge the de-culverting of the River Lea and the downgrading of St. Mary’s Road would have a positive impact on the setting of the church. However, we are not convinced that the proposals for the public realm go sufficiently far in creating a great new public space which Luton deserves. In this respect it does not satisfy the policy requirements in the NPPF in relation for new developments to enhance the significance of heritage assets, paragraph 137, and for good design which integrates and responds to the surrounding historic environment, paragraphs 58 and 61. Nor does it achieve the aims of the Local Plan in relation to how it complements the historic town centre. A braver scheme would remove the traffic from St. Mary’s Road or seek a use of shared space. The public realm would ideally relate directly to the church rather than responding to the stadium.

Finally, we have concerns about the outline nature of the application and the level of detail provided. This makes it difficult to assess the impact of the detailed design and the quality of this. It is particularly hard to fully understand how the public realm relates to the surrounding townscape. Your authority should therefore be satisfied that it has sufficient details. Your authority should look to secure critical aspects of the design at this stage (this might include the massing and height of the development) and, if you are mined to grant consent, be confident that the detailed design which would follow would be of an appropriate standard.

Recommendation

Given the advance stage of the draft Local Plan, your authority should consider whether it is appropriate to determine the application in advance of the publication of the Inspector’s report. The proposal would have a harmful impact on the grade I listed Church of St. Mary and the Plaiter’s Lea conservation area. While more detailed information about the design would allow for a fuller assessment of this, the broad impact as a result of the scale of the new development is clear. However, we consider that a more sensitive understanding of the significance of the designated heritage assets could result in proposals which help to mitigate the impact of the development on the historic environment. In line with paragraph 129 of the NPPF your authority should seek to achieve this. The policy requires your authority to carry out an analysis of the justification for the development and the level of harm it entails. If your authority is satisfied that there is a clear and convincing justification for the harm, you should weigh the harm that cannot be avoided against the public benefits of the scheme, paragraph 134. While the application seeks outline consent, your authority should be satisfied that any critical elements are resolved at this stage and, should consent be granted, that the future detailed applications secure the high quality, sensitive design that the site and town as a whole merits.”

25 August 2017

“Summary

Following our earlier letter of advice dated 20 October 2016 the design for the stadium has been amended and we have received further information regarding the proposals. We have also met with the applicant’s team to discuss this. This letter contains our updated advice and should be read in conjunction with our previous advice. Historic England Advice

Our initial letter advised that the development would have a harmful impact on the setting of the Church of St. Mary and character of the Plaiter’s Lea Conservation Area. We considered that the proposal could be amended to moderate the impact of the development. While we advised that the mass of a football stadium would cause harm, we also acknowledged that a well-designed, high quality façade could help to enhance the setting of the church. In response to this the height of the stadium has been reduced and the design has been revised and more fully developed.

The roof of the stadium has been redesigned and reduced from 28 meters to 23 meters. This has been achieved through angling the roof down. The depth of the roof has therefore been notably reduced. In addition to reducing the height of the stadium, this has resulted in a more refined detail. The first floor of the stadium has been set back to a recessed position behind the vertical supports of the second floor. This, together with the new roof detail, has reduced some of the strong horizontal elements of the initial design. The result is a more elegant design with greater interest and subtle use of the movement in the façade. The resulting design is therefore more successful than the initial proposal.

We are pleased to see the revisions to the design and view this as an improvement. However, we do not consider the reduction in height or amendments to the design have reduced the harmful impact of a building of this scale would have on the significance of the church. Despite the reduction of 5 metres in the height, it remains a very large building which would dominate the church.

The additional information provides more detail on the river corridor. We also note the applicant’s desire to take further steps to reduce the traffic along St. Mary’s Road to improve the setting of the church and to better integrate the new development with the existing townscape. We continue to recognise the reduction in the lanes of St. Mary’s Road and the de- culverting of the River Lea are an enhancement. However, our previous advice had encouraged the applicant to go further in terms of integrating the development with the church and townscape. These aspects of the scheme have not been developed.

No further amendments or information has been provided on the northern part of the development site which includes the tall residential blocks. Again this is disappointing. We note the reference on the parameter plan to deal with the road and traffic islands that sit between the proposed development and the Plaiter’s Lea Conservation Area, but at the reserved matters stage.

Since our initial advice was submitted, the draft Local Plan has been considered at public examination and the inspector has produced his report. The main modifications include policy LP9 relating to Power Court. This is amended to state that the development should preserve and seek opportunities to enhance the character and appearance of the Plaiter’s Lea Conservation Area and to preserve and seek opportunities to enhance the setting the grade I Church of St. Mary.

To conclude, we welcome the reduction in height of the stadium and the design amendments. These are improvements to the scheme and result in a more successful design. While this is a positive step, it does not outweigh the impact the mass of the building has on the setting of the church and the conservation area. We remain of the view this is harmful. It is disappointing that the revisions do not address the other areas of concern set out in our earlier letter.

Recommendation

Historic England has serious concerns regarding the impact of the development on heritage grounds as it would have a harmful impact on the grade I church and conservation area. We consider the scheme could be further amended to help to mitigate the impact of the development. If however your authority is satisfied there is clear and convincing evidence for the development and the level of harm, the harm that cannot be avoided should be weighed against the public benefits of the scheme.

If consent is granted, further amendments should be sought as the detailed design is worked up. Your authority should take these representations into account in determining the application. If there are any material changes to the proposals, or you would like further advice, please contact us. Please advise us of the decision in due course.”

28 November 2018

“The medieval Church of St. Mary lies to the east of Power Court. It is Luton's only grade I building. The site currently does not make a particular contribution to the significance of the church beyond the potential its vacant nature allows for views of the building and the space it provides to appreciate it. However, the proposal to construct a football stadium on the site would, by virtue of its scale, dominate the adjacent church. The cumulative impact of this and the other modern, large buildings on the setting and significance of the church would be considerable. This would result in a harm to the significance of Luton's only grade I listed building.

The proposal could be amended to moderate its impact on the historic environment and are therefore not satisfied that there is clear and convincing evidence for the harm and recommend that the scheme is amended to minimise the harm. The harm should then be weighed against the public benefits the proposal would deliver in line with the policy in the NPPF. While for a scheme of this size, the submission of an outline application is understandable, the successful integration of the development within the townscape will be depend on the quality of the detailed design.”

98. Environment Agency - No objection subject to conditions.

99. Thames Water – No objections subject to a condition. Supplementary Comments: foul water points of connection to the public sewer system as well as the connection method should be provided to any proposed connection point. If there is a supply connection the supply pump rate should be provided.

100. Affinity Water - The proposed development site is located within an Environment Agency defined groundwater Source Protection Zone (SPZ) corresponding to Crescent Road Pumping Station. This is a public water supply, comprising of a number of Chalk abstraction boreholes, operated by Affinity Water Ltd. The construction works and operation of the proposed development site should be done in accordance with the relevant British Standards and Best Management Practices, thereby significantly reducing the groundwater pollution risk. It should be noted that the construction works may exacerbate any existing pollution. If any pollution is found at the site then the appropriate monitoring and remediation methods will need to be undertaken. Where piling foundation works are implemented, the suitability of the piling technique should consider the findings of the ground investigation

101. Wildlife Trust – Any comments received will be reported at the Meeting

102. Chamber of Commerce – Any comments received will be reported at the Meeting

103. Arndale Traders Association – Any comments received will be reported at the Meeting

104. Bedfordshire Police (AO) – Any comments received will be reported at the Meeting

105. National Police Chief’s Council - The inclusion of uncontrolled parking for customers directly below the main retail and residential space of the planned sites does not achieve one of the primary counter terrorist mitigation objectives of separating vehicles from the most densely populated areas of the complex.

However, if, there is no other practical design layout option available for this particular site, then comprehensive procedural, control and construction ‘hardening’ measures could be considered as the next best solution in the circumstances.

The permanent and physical access control measures, the ‘hardening’ of the structural frame, the incorporation of laminated glazing elements, and the blast protection of transit and pedestrian exit routes, are all beneficial provisions that will reduce the risk. In these circumstances, residual risks will remain for which there is no reasonable or practical mitigation. However, if the residual risk in the design is still of a sufficient level to raise safety and security concerns the Local Authority will wish to take a view as to whether it is content to accept the risks.

106. Police - Architectural Liaison Officer - Same comments as the National Police Chief’s Council – above.

107. Bedfordshire Fire Authority - No objection – general points raised:

- Commercial buildings: hydrants should be located 120m apart with no building being more than 60m away from the hydrant. - Hotel (if over 3 floors in height): fire hydrants should be no more than 90 metres apart, with no individual building more than 45 metres from its nearest hydrant. - Where dry risers are fitted within a building, hydrants should be installed within 18m of the riser inlet. - Consideration should be given to the provision of hydrants in an area of the football stadium to ensure they are within easy reach of the entry points.

108. Luton Health Primary Care Trust – Any comments received will be reported at the Meeting

109. Bedfordshire Health – Any comments received will be reported at the Meeting

110. Sport England – Any comments received will be reported at the Meeting

111. The Football Association - The Football Association is in full support of the Luton Town proposals to relocate to Power Court in the centre of Luton. The site can be accessed by excellent public transport routes and will significantly enhance the match day offer currently available around and inside the new stadium for its stakeholders and supporters.

112. The English Football League - Support the proposed development. The proposed new stadium at Power Court offers Luton Town a very real opportunity to secure a stadium and facilities fit for the 21st century offering the club a solid foundation to progress on and off the pitch. Not only will the proposed developments put the football club on a sound financial footing, but they will also regenerate an area of the town, create jobs and boost the local economy.

113. Active Luton – Any comments received will be reported at the Meeting

114. Corporate Energy Manager - The site is in outline stage at present so there is no specific detail. Going forwards, an innovative approach to the development is encouraged as there is a sufficient variety of buildings to sustain a limited district heating system and use of CHP, as well as zero carbon technologies such as PV.

115. Wardown Museum - The site is directly in the centre of the town and equal distant from the towns 2 museums of Wardown Park Museum and Stockwood Discovery Centre. Their combined visitors are over 250,000 per year and as such represents a significant draw for the Borough and for business and residents and make an economic contribution to the town.

Both museums would need significant investments to improve access, facilities and services to enable them to cope with a considerable increase in local traffic and people to the site and therefore request contributions through the S106 (£50,000 requested).

116. St. Mary’s Church - Broadly support the overall plans and welcome the lowering of the stands near the church. However, it is important that the development does not impact on the functioning of the church, for worship on Sundays and during the week and hiring of the premises.

Traffic – the increase in traffic on both weekdays and weekends on Gypsy Lane, Crawley Green roundabout, St Marys Road and Hitchin Road will exacerbate existing traffic. Reasonable mitigation should be considered.

Noise – the impact of noise is measured in the reports at a standard height of 4 metres but the ‘church’ part of St. Mary’s rises to approximately 10-15 metres and the side walls facing the stadium are mostly window. The acoustic quality of the church would allow noise to enter from the stadium and resonate considerably.

117. Statutory Publicity: The application has been notified to 3319 adjoining occupiers. The said occupiers were consulted on the 12 September 2016. A site notice was displayed, and a further 8 notices were posted in the surrounding area. A notice was also placed in the local newspaper.

118. There have 62 letters of objection, 80 anonymous letters have been received, and 8727 letters of support have also been received.

119. The matters raised by the representations are as follows:

Objections:

Letters of objection raise the following points, namely against any development at Power Court, the site should be developed for other uses, Designs unacceptable, noise pollution, light pollution, traffic congestion/parking, impact on River Lea, site is not integrated with the rest of the town, impact on St Marys Church, impact of live music, construction works will be disruptive, anti-social behaviour/increased litter, impact on shopping centre, impact on local house prices, the linkage of the site to the site at Newlands Park (16/01401/OUTEIA)

MAIN PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

120. The key planning issues are considered to be as follows: The main planning considerations relate to:

 The principle of the development,  Delivery  The Environmental Statement:  Economic Impact  Urban design and the impact on the Town Centre,  Archaeology and Heritage  Stadium operations and Impact  Traffic and Parking  Construction Impacts  Impacts on Neighbours  Other environmental matters  Community Benefits  Sustainable Design  Accessibility  Planning Obligations  Third Party Representations

PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT

121. Planning law requires that applications for planning permission be determined in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise (Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and section 70(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990). The legal test is whether the proposed development complies with the development plan as a whole.

122. Accordingly the starting point for the consideration of the proposals, the subject of this application, is the Luton Local Plan 2011 – 2031 Adopted in November 2017. The application site is located within the Town Centre, as identified on the inset map on the Proposals Map of the Adopted Local Plan. In this respect the relevant policies are LLP1, LLP2, LLP3 and LLP9.

123. The proposals for development, in the first instance fall to be considered against Policy LLP1 (Presumption in favour of Sustainable Development), Policy LLP2 (Spatial Development Strategy), Policy LLP3 (Luton Town Centre Strategy) and Policy LLP9 (Power Court). There are of course other policy matters, the substance of which is detailed above (paragraphs 12 – 64) but these will be addressed subsequently in this report in the context of their respective headings.

124. Policy LLP1 states that the Council will work proactively and positively with all applicants to help shape development proposals. In this case the site has been the subject of discussion with the Applicant, since its submission on an ongoing basis, to consider the many issues which have arisen during the consideration of the application.

125. The application is in outline form only, with all matters, save for access, reserved for subsequent approval. A Design and Access Statement (DAS) has been submitted along with sketch drawings which provide an indication as to the scale mass and bulk of the development proposed. Details of design and appearance will be reserved for subsequent approval submitted for consideration. At that stage comments made by Historic England will inform the scale and design of the proposed stadium in the context of its relationship with the Grade 1 Listed Building and conservation area, and the development as a whole.

126. In the wider context of the policy the proposed development offers the opportunity to regenerate a site which has remained in a derelict state for the last 20 years. To this end the development would be consistent with the policy objective which seeks to encourage growth and sustainable development and to manage change. Planning conditions will ensure that the development will be consistent with the objective.

127. The proposals include the provision for the growth in homes, jobs and services that constitute sustainable development. The proposed development would provide a mixed use of residential development, an entertainment and conference venue, educational/community and commercial floorspace, retail/food and beverage floorspace and a foodstore. The provision of these uses would be in accordance with the Policy LPP1. The matter of the football stadium will be addressed subsequently.

128. Policy LLP2 sets out the Spatial Development Strategy for the Borough. The development proposals make provision for upto 550 residential units, which will contribute to the net additional housing requirement.

129. Policy LLP2B states that employment in B Class uses will be delivered through 69 hectares of employment development on Strategic Allocations, which specifies Power Court. The policy specifically refers to “B Class uses”. In relation to this policy there is a limited amount of such floorspace provided as part of the proposals, 2,800 sq. m of mixed educational/community and commercial floorspace which will include office uses. In the context of this policy there is limited compliance with Policy LLP2B

130. Policy LLP2C relates to “Town Centre and Retail uses. Clearly the relevant part of the policy in relation to these proposals is that which relates to the reinforcing and enhancing the vitality, viability and regeneration of Luton Town Centre as a regional centre. It is evident that some of the uses proposed would contribute towards the regeneration of the town centre since the proposals would provide community facilities, housing and some retail and employment development.

131. In terms of employment within the Borough paragraph 4.11 sets a figure of 18,000 jobs, which is comprised as follows, 8,000 B Class jobs and 10,000 non B Class jobs. The applicant has estimated that during the construction phase this will result in 127 permanent construction jobs, and depending on league position, LTFC will provide 47 – 83 jobs, with the other elements of development generating approximately 793 FTE (Full Time equivalent) jobs, a total of up to 876 jobs. It is clear on the basis of the jobs that will result from the development, and the additional economic value to the Luton economy between August 2020 and July 2040 (almost £23m a year), that the development would be consistent with the policy objectives of LLP2C.

132. Policy LLP2E states that “the natural environment, historic environment and heritage assets of the borough will be protected and enhanced as set out in Policies LLP27, LLP28, LLP29, and LLP30 in the Local Plan….” Since Policy LLP2E is addressed by compliance with the said policies LLP27 – LLP30, these matters will be addressed subsequently in this report.

133. Policy LLP3 sets out the “Luton Town Centre Strategy”, identifying specifically in the narrative (paragraph 4.33) the two strategic allocations which are contained within the Town Centre, namely Power Court LLP9 and the Creative Quarter LLP11. The policy is predicated by the premise that “Luton Town Centre will be a location for positive change and will be a focus for economic and residential growth and an improved natural and built environment. Building on the town’s rich heritage this mixed use area will provide a balanced offer of high quality residential development, offices and studios, creative industries, independent and national retail, education institutions and thriving public spaces with a vibrant café culture and night time economy.”

134. It is clear from Paragraph A of Policy LLP3 that Power Court (see Policy LLP9) is one of two sites which will be a key focus for development and change over the plan period. If the proposals are considered against the following criteria:

i. contribute towards residential growth of around 2,100 new dwellings which will provide a significant contribution towards the new homes in the borough and create an expanded residential community in the centre of Luton – The proposed development will contribute up to 550 dwellings.

ii. contribute towards job creation from retail, offices, creative industries, education, training and leisure – As set out above the proposed development provides for a mix of development, which includes retail, offices, entertainment venues, educational/community/commercial floorspace, hotel and educational a foodstore. The proposals would contribute towards job creation, it is estimated that some 876 jobs would be created.

iii. provide circa 3,400 sq. m net convenience retail floorspace in the current period and provide circa 4,420 sq. m of non-bulky comparison goods for the period to 2020 and 30,096 sq. m by 2025, hotels, and leisure uses to maintain and enhance the retail regional role of the town centre – As set out above the development would involve a foodstore (upto 3000 sq. m), upto 10,800 sq. m of retail and food and beverage floorspace. The matter of the loss of potential comparison retail floorspace will be addressed subsequently in this section. iv. high quality residential development will respect the local distinctiveness of the town centre whilst making best use of opportunities for higher density development; As set out in response to “i.” above the proposals will provide up to 550 dwellings The matter of the details can be addressed by condition to ensure that a high quality residential scheme can be delivered. v. opportunities for car free development will be encouraged where it conforms with Policy LLP32; The indicative design of the proposed development as set out in the DAS indicates a development which is not car free in as much that it will generate traffic and there is car parking provision, but there is a choice of transport mode given the proximity of the Busway, and the rail station. Internally the development proposes piazzas and walkways. The extent of these detail will be the subject of a condition to ensure that there is consistency with this policy. vi. contribute to the achievement of a mixed area which is vibrant and active including enhancing a night time economy. The nature of the mix of use proposed would provide a diversity of activity within the Power Court part of the defined Town Centre area, and as set out above it is considered that this diversity will fulfil this policy objective. vii new development and redevelopment in the town centre will contribute positively to the economic regeneration and reuse of heritage assets while respecting the existing local distinctiveness and quality of the heritage, including sites with archaeological interest, in particular ensuring that the character of the Conservation Areas (Town Centre and Plaiters Lea), listed buildings and landmarks (including St Mary’s Church and the Town Hall) are maintained and enhanced. The Policy states that Development should “deliver a high quality, safe and publicly accessible pedestrian environment on key routes within and connecting to the town centre. Historic England were consulted regarding the development proposals in relation to the setting of the Grade 1 Listed building, St Marys Church, and the Plaiters Lea Conservation Area. Historic England’s consultation response raised a strong objection to the development, and its scale. More recently, this objection has been maintained. There were discussions between HE and the applicant, which resulted in a potential for reduction of the height of the stand on the western elevation. HE, consider the Power Court proposal could be amended further to help to mitigate the impact of this development. On this basis whilst HE continue to hold serious concerns regarding the impact of the development on heritage grounds, they have advised that if the Council is satisfied that there is clear and convincing evidence for the development, and the level of harm, the harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal in line with policy. On this basis paragraph 196 of the Framework is relevant. It is for the Council to consider the harm to be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal. x. Deliver a high quality, safe and publicly accessible pedestrian environment on key routes within and connecting to the town centre including maximising opportunities created by the completion of the inner ring road and other improvement schemes throughout the town; The Design Statement submitted with the application provides an indication of the form of development. It is evident that the proposed development would provide for continuity of linkage with the rest of the town in terms of open space, pedestrian space and visual connection. The Stadium, particularly the pitch, is intended to be seen as “a new urban square” with extensive permeability to the surrounding area. The details of this aspect of the development will be submitted for further consideration as part of reserved matters proposals. xi. make more effective use of the River Lea as a strategic corridor forming an historic, cultural and ecological landscape feature of the town, connecting into and through the town centre increasing visibility and accessibility wherever possible for structural and flood maintenance, protection buffer zones (with native planting), cycling and pedestrian routes, green spaces, and habitats of recreational and biodiversity value along its course; The proposed development intends to utilise the River Lea as a design feature, one of the considerations being to provide a terrace arrangement, in conjunction with an area of open space. On this basis this policy criteria can be met. As stated previously these details of the development will be submitted as part of reserved matters proposals. xii. consider opportunities for enhancing existing or provision of new quality green spaces, public art, public leisure space and environmental education; The analysis set out in xi is applicable in respect of this criteria. xiii. development should protect and improve water quality and not increase the capacity load on the River Lea culvert; No objections have been raised by the Environment Agency or the Council’s Lead Flood Manager. This matter will be reassessed when the details in respect of design and landscaping are submitted.

xiv. consider opportunities for inclusive use by the wider community including publicly accessible green space in accordance with Policy LLP27. The concept used by the Applicant’s architect will provide, as described, particularly the pitch, as a “New Urban Square”. Additionally it is indicated in the Design and Access Statement to provide Green Space within the overall development proposals. The detail of these proposals will be assessed as part of reserved matters details. The proposals are not therefore inconsistent with this criteria at this stage.

135. Policy LLP9 sets out the policy framework for the allocated site Power Court. The key issues in respect of the policy highlight as part of the policy approach the main objective which is to maximise the redevelopment opportunity. The policy states that Power Court will deliver a mix of town centre uses. The following uses are identified as all acceptable in principle as components of a mixed use development; housing, convenience and comparison retail, leisure, cultural and entertainment uses and B1 offices.

136. The Policy continues that the land at Power Court, should include around 600 dwellings and circa 3,393 sq. m net retail convenience floorspace. In so far as proposals are concerned the proposals would provide for a foodstore of upto 3000 sq. m. The policy also states that the site could provide for a proportion of the borough’s overall identified need for comparison floorspace within the town centre. In this respect it is proposed upto 10800 sq. m of floorspace to be delivered for A1 – A5 uses. To this extent the proposed development partially complies with the policy. The remaining space that would have been comparison retail floorspace will be taken up by the football stadium.

137. The Inspector following the Local Plan examination, in his report addresses the matter of retail floor space, and poses the question “Will the Plan deliver the required amount of comparison floorspace”. The Inspector concludes that “if comparison retail is not delivered at Power Court or if the retail component of a mixed use scheme is significantly reduced, there are no clear alternative locations which can be identified at this stage within or on the edge of the town centre which could be brought forward to substantially make up the likely shortfall (which could be significant in size). Taking all of this into account, there is a significant risk that the Plan may not deliver the 30,096 sq. m of comparison retail floorspace by 2025 sought by Policy LP3 and as recommended by the Retail Study or even the lower range figure in the study of 18,057 sq. m to 2025.”

138. The Inspector addressed these various issues, in particular the matter of retail, and the deliverability of comparison floorspace. It is a fact that there is, as part of the proposals, the provision of 10,800 sq. m of retail, food and beverage floorspace. However the specific extent of comparison retail floorspace is not fixed at this stage. There is nevertheless flexibility in respect of this provision, and there could be some accommodation of comparison retail floorspace.

139. However if this development were to proceed then the proportion of comparison retail floorspace envisaged to be located in Power Court will not be able to be accommodated, and as such this aspect of the proposed development is therefore contrary to Policies LLP3 and LLP9.

140. The Inspector in considering the matter of retail provision, and the town centre, did recognise that the Council’s approach to such provision provided flexibility against a background of uncertain delivery. He also recognised there were uncertainties about the delivery of a mixed use scheme at Power Court, including any substantial component of comparison retail, he stated this because the Club controls the site and has acquired it with the specific intention of developing it for a football stadium.

141. Secondly, the Inspector also recognised that the actual quantity of comparison floorspace that might be delivered is difficult to quantify definitively, this was because the background evidence provided as part of the Local Plan submissions, comprising the Luton Retail Study Up-date 2015, on the quantum of comparison retail for the Local Plan had not been clearly or compellingly justified. In summary, he concluded that it was clear that there is some potential for comparison floorspace to be provided within the town centre away from Power Court. However, it seems likely that the sites indicated by the Council could only make a partial contribution towards providing the 30,096 sqm for comparison goods sought by Policy LP3.

142. Consequently, if comparison retail floorspace is not delivered at Power Court, there are no clear alternative locations which can be identified at this stage within or on the edge of the town centre which could be brought forward to substantially make up the shortfall (which could be significant in size).

143. Returning to the details of the Policy Criteria A requires that development should accord with the Spatial Development Strategy, other policies in the plan and should address the following requirements:

i. proposals should be accompanied by a comprehensive masterplan which includes indicative layout, materials, access, massing, uses and phasing, and the proposed delivery mechanism; The development proposals are in outline, and all matters, save for access, are reserved for subsequent approval. The indicative details comprised in the DAS set out the concept that comprises the basis for the development, and it is anticipated that this would form the basis of the Masterplan, which would be required by condition.

ii. proposals should include measures to ensure that development on the site is accessible from the Town Centre Shopping Area and is perceived as being a part of the town centre; The indicative plans provided thus far show a development that would be actively permeable in the context of the providing links to the University and Carnival Arts, St Marys Church, the Mall, the Town Centre and the transport hub. To this extent the site is capable of integration to the town centre, and conditions will secure that this integration is achieved

iii. development should respect and enhance the setting and context of the site and its high visual profile. High quality design should be integral to the scheme to landmark buildings, adjacent vistas and the public realm, the University of Bedfordshire Campus and the UK Centre for Carnival Arts and development should preserve, and seek opportunities to enhance, the character and appearance of the Plaiters Lea Conservation Area and to preserve, and seek opportunities to enhance, the setting of the Grade I listed St Mary’s Church; High quality design will be secured through The Heritage impact of the proposed development is assessed at para.

iv. Make more effective use of the River Lea as an accessible strategic green infrastructure for the town providing habitat and an accessible historic landscape feature, and consider options for deculverting and redirecting the River Lea channel where feasible to link with nearby walking and cycling networks; This criteria has been addressed under Policy LLP3 xii

v. proposals will need to mitigate flood risk issues of the site by integrating Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) and or other reasonably suitable mitigation measures; No objections have been raised by the Environment Agency or the Council’s Lead Flood Manager. This matter will be reassessed when the details are submitted to accompany the reserved matters application, and a condition will be imposed to address this matter.

vi. ensure that development elevations maintain the high visual profile of the site and maintain views to other adjacent vistas in the town (e.g. Hart Hill and the railway line); The Planning and Design Statement sets out the design concept for the site, however the detailed design and layout will be the subject of further applications, for reserved matters, a condition is to be imposed requiring Masterplan details to be submitted, and other details in relation to scale, mass, bulk and appearance, as part of a Design Code submission.

vii. land decontamination and works affecting the River Lea should be carried out in line with best practice available and be in accordance with Policy LP38 to avoid any harmful impact on the water resources. The Environment Agency require conditions to address contamination and conditions from the Council’s Environmental Protection Team will ensure that this criteria is met.

144. In the consideration of Policy LLP24B there are 6 criteria against which community facilities development falls to be considered, and subject to such appropriate consideration planning permission may be granted. However before making such an assessment it is important to consider whether or not a “football stadium” qualifies as a Community Facility. The policy in full, and the definition of a “Community Facility” is set out at Paragraph 46 of this report.

145. The said definition refers to Public, private and third sector provision facilities (including those within educational establishments with shared use and public Community Facility access) that provide for the health and well-being, social, educational, spiritual, recreational, leisure and cultural needs of the community. Most D1 (non-residential institutions) and D2 (assembly and leisure) uses fall within this definition. Given that a Football Ground, with Stadium is defined, in the Land Use Gazetteer as a D2 use, then in land use terms per se such a use would be a community use. When this is coupled to the way in which the Football Club operates within the Community, actively supporting local charities and young people through self-initiated community projects, then it is clear that the Stadium can be considered as a “Community Facility”.

146. Given that a football stadium use can reasonably be considered to be a Community Facility then such a use can be considered against the following criteria: i. a demonstrable local or regional need is established, and the facility is well related to the area it serves. It is a fact that the Football Club has an established Stadium at Kenilworth Road. The Existing Stadium, as advised by the Applicant, “no longer meets the current needs and aspirations of the Club” The Applicant has provided details of an appeal decision into one of the previous stadium proposals where the Secretary of State in paragraph 20 of the decision letter stated that “there is a compelling need for Luton Town Football Club to relocate to another site”. The said appeal decision was 20 years ago. Secondly the Local Plan in Strategic Objective 9 recognises the need “to deliver a new football stadium” The need for the Stadium is well established. Secondly, the location is in the centre of the town and is well located in relation the area it serves in the heart of the Borough. ii. it would not adversely affect the viability and vitality of a District or Neighbourhood centre; This policy relates to the impact of the development on District or Neighbourhood centres. The application site is situated in the Town Centre. The nearest District Centre is Bury Park, and It is a fact that the existing football stadium is 900 metres from Bury Park, the proposed stadium would be 900 to 1000 metres. The proposed football stadium has to be considered on the basis of being part of a wider comprehensive scheme which is part policy compliant. It is not considered that the introduction of a football stadium use, would affect the viability of the nearest District Centre, since the presence of a Stadium per se would not affect the status quo.

iii. there would be no unacceptable effect on the amenity of any surrounding residential dwellings and other uses; The impact/effect on the amenity of surrounding uses will be addressed subsequently in this report. iv. it does not take land either in or allocated for other uses, unless it is demonstrated that the need for the facility outweighs that for the existing or allocated use; It is a fact that the proposed stadium use is part of a comprehensive development proposal, most other elements of which are policy compliant. Accordingly the issue arises as to whether the need for the Stadium element outweighs the allocation of the site to meet retail purposes. This matter of the use of the site has been addressed in this report and will be addressed in the conclusions to this topic.

v. there is suitable vehicular access and safe dropping off and picking up areas; Highway matters are addressed under a separate topic.

vi. where the proposed facility would be in premises that are used for another purpose, it remains subordinate to the main use of the premises. This is not applicable

147. It is clear from the foregoing discussion that the matter of the principle of development largely turns on the point of the acceptability of the football stadium, and whether its provision would outweigh the loss of the opportunity for the provision of a “substantial proportion of comparison retail floorspace” as envisaged by Policies LLP3 and LLP9.

148. In paragraph 278 of his report, the Inspector recognised that a central location is likely to be more accessible by public transport, and on foot, for more supporters than a location on the edge of the town. He also perceived that ancillary community and commercial uses could be more successful in a central location because they might attract more use. On this basis it was concluded that a football stadium could, in principle, be an appropriate use within a defined town centre.

149. In paragraph 279 of his report the Inspector also accepted that “there are now uncertainties about the delivery of a mixed use scheme at Power Court, including any substantial component of comparison retail, given the Club controls the site and has acquired it with the specific intention of developing it for a football stadium. It is possible that if the Club were ultimately unable to deliver a stadium here, decisions might then be made, at some stage, to sell the site or to pursue a different mix of uses.”

150. Also material in this consideration is the fact, however, that the other proposed elements of this application are policy compliant, which is material to the determination of this application. The Inspector accepted (paragraph 286) that the proposals would deliver uses “in something like the broad quantities sought by the Plan.”

151. In so far as other material considerations are concerned, it is important to consider that the application site has remained vacant and derelict for a considerable number of years, despite the submission of applications, no development/redevelopment of the site has been, thus far, delivered. Successive plans (the Former Borough wide development plan and the Luton Local Plan 2001 – 2011) have identified the site as a major redevelopment opportunity for development. The adopted Local Plan carried forward this opportunity, and continued to emphasise the need for the regeneration of this high profile site. In all aspects of the Policy framework, excluding the provision of the football stadium, there is compliance with Policies LLP1. LLP3, LLP9. In addition the football stadium would be consistent with Policy LLP24B.

152. The NPPF states in Paragraph 38 that “Local Planning Authorities should approach decisions on proposed development in a positive and creative way. They should use the full range of planning tools available, including brownfield registers and permission in principle, and work proactively with applicants to secure developments that will improve the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area. Decision-makers at every level should seek to approve applications for sustainable development where possible.”

153. Paragraph 117 of the Framework states that “Planning policies and decisions should promote an effective use of land in meeting the need for homes and other uses”. Furthermore, there is Strategic Objective 9 of the Adopted Local Plan which seeks to deliver a new Luton football stadium in a location capable of good access to transport infrastructure along with associated uses, shared venue events, and ancillary sports related uses.

154. Accordingly, having regard to Policies LLP1, LLP2, LLP3, LLP9 and LLP24 the requirements of the Framework, the matters raised in the Inspector’s Report, and to all material considerations, notwithstanding the fact that the provision of a football stadium would not be Policy compliant in terms of the displacement of comparison retail floorspace, it is considered on balance that i) the mix of development, ii) the partial compliance with policy, in respect of the majority of uses proposed, iii) that the site has remained vacant and undeveloped for some considerable time, iv) there would be community benefits, that all of these factors are relevant and material to the determination of this outline planning application.

DELIVERY

155. It will be noted from the Planning History that there have been a number of development proposals, and expressions of interest, in respect of proposals for the redevelopment of the application site, however, these have not come to fruition. As is set out there were proposals for a redevelopment to provide a new railway station and bus station plus shops, hotel, restaurant and bar uses and cafe with associated infrastructure, car parking under reference 05/01673/OU. However that apart, other than the application in 2005, and some interest from British Land, development of the site has not come about, despite it being continually allocated as a site for regeneration.

156. The application now before members is, therefore, the first for a considerable number of years (13), which provides comprehensive proposals to regenerate this site. The site is owned by the Applicant’ in its entirety, and has been bought specifically to relocate the football stadium from Kenilworth Road. The additional uses incorporated into the proposal would provide for the comprehensive redevelopment of the site. In particular the Community use would be a benefit. The fact that this application has now come forward, in the absence of any such proposals in the last 13 years, means that there is at least an opportunity for delivery.

157. Reference is made in the Planning Statement to the development at Newlands Road/J10 (Paragraph 4.15 of the Planning Statement). It is a fact that a planning application has been submitted under reference 16/01401/OUTEIA, which includes, inter alia, the provision of up to 37000 sq. m of comparison retail floorspace. The suitability, or otherwise, of these proposals is not for consideration at this time, and is not material to the determination of this application

158. Accordingly members should be aware that the prospects for delivery of these proposals are for the time being uncertain.

THE ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT:

159. Each chapter is briefly summarised below.

Transport

160. The transport chapter considers the impact of the development on traffic and transport. The chapter identifies study areas, including a number of junctions.

161. Baseline conditions have been identified by using existing traffic levels and traffic flows.

162. Key impacts on traffic and transport during construction include trips to the site by construction vehicles, but the impact is not considered to be significant and the worst case scenario demonstrates a change in traffic flow of less than 30% on all link roads. Without mitigation, other impacts involve noise, vibration, dust/air quality and impact on pedestrian access to site and surroundings resulting in a temporary effect of minor adverse significance. Proposed mitigation includes a construction access which ensure materials are transport as efficiently as possible, the preparation of a Framework Construction Management Plan which includes (amongst others) site management measures, wheel washing facilities, pre-booking of deliveries and road sweepers to address dirt carried onto public roads.

163. During the operational phase, traffic generation has been calculated. Estimates show that for non-stadium users, the junctions in the study area would not exceed a 30% change in traffic which is a negligible impact in terms of severity.

164. Driver delay has been considered, with capacity assessments demonstrating over capacity during both the AM and PM peak hours. The significance on driver delay is anticipated to be minor adverse. The impact on pedestrian delay is considered to be negligible, as is the impact on pedestrian amenity and fear and intimidation. Finally, delays on cyclists are considered to be negligible. The impact on public transport has been considered, with a negligible impact on bus and rail services.

165. The operational phase for stadium users has been calculated, taking into account full capacity of the stadium at 23,000 people. This increase in traffic is considered to occur for approximately 30 match days a year and the impact on the junctions in the study area are of temporary, minor adverse nature. There would be an impact on driver delay, with a temporary moderate adverse impact. Pedestrian and cyclist delay would be of minor adverse impact.

Heritage and Archaeology

166. The heritage and archaeology chapter has been informed by a Desk- Based Assessment and an Archaeological Watching Brief. The content of these documents was discussed with LBC and Historic England.

167. The ES, based on reports undertaken, considers whether archaeological remains have been found within the Study Area and draws the conclusion that any potential Prehistoric and Roman remains would likely comprise unstratified finds which are of limited archaeological significance. Early medieval and medieval depositions within the site would have experienced only limited disturbance and could be of archaeological significance. Finally, post-medieval and modern deposits are likely within the Site, but are of limited archaeological significance.

168. Whilst there are no Listed Buildings within the site, St Mary’s Church is within close proximity of the site and the Plaiters Lea Conservation Area is located within 20m of the site (although the site is not located within the Conservation Area). The ES considers the significance of the heritage assets but concludes that the significance of St. Mary’s Church is ‘best experienced’ from inside the Church and from within the churchyard.

169. During construction, there could be some disturbance to the archaeological remains; however, in terms of impact, it is concluded that this would range in harm caused from a less than substantial harm to the archaeological significance to no harm. With regards to impact on the Listed Building, there will be no physical impact on St. Mary’s Church and the visibility of construction works would be temporary in nature. Subsequently there would be no harm to the significance of the Church. Similarly, the construction works would cause no harm to the heritage significance and experience of the Conservation Area.

170. With regards to operational effects on archaeological remains, the ES concludes that there would be no harm to buried archaeological remains. With respect to the impact on St. Mary’s Church, it is concluded that the site does not influence the setting of the Church, which contributes to its significance and as such there would be no harm to its significance.

171. To mitigate against any potential adverse construction effects, a programme of archaeological investigation will be prepared and agreed by LBC

Water Resources

172. The water resources chapter assesses the likely effects of the development on water resources. This assessment includes a consideration on flood risk to the site and surrounding area, impact of the drainage system, surface water and groundwater quality and potable and foul water systems.

173. Modifications to the River Lea watercourse are proposed, with the River diverted to run along the southern boundary of the site and de-culverted in sections. Existing offsite connections would be rerouted and reconnected to the realigned watercourse. This alters the surface water runoff regime. During construction this provides a temporary minor adverse effect. The construction phase also has the potential to adversely affect groundwater quality and without a suitable drainage strategy in place the effect would be major adverse. Similarly, without a suitable drainage strategy in place the construction phase has the potential to affect water quality, with the effect being minor adverse.

174. Proposed mitigation during the construction phase includes the preparation of a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) which would include measures to mitigate against adverse impacts on flood risk, drainage, water quality and water resources. In addition, a Phase 2 intrusive geo-environmental ground investigation report and a Foundation Works Risk Assessment Report will be prepared.

175. The ES highlights that the site is currently at high risk of surface water flooding due to the potential collapse of the culvert, which is in poor condition. However, the culvert will be removed as part of the works to realign the River Lea. This will reduce the risk of surface water flooding. During the operational phase of development, it is concluded that there would be a negligible effect on human health and wellbeing as a result of flooding.

176. During operational phases, during heavy rainfall there is the potential for drainage from impermeable surfaces to include contaminants which would have a major adverse effect on water quality of groundwater. These contaminants also have the potential to cause a minor adverse effect on water quality of the River Lea.

177. Proposed mitigation during the operational phase includes the recommendation that finished floor levels are set above surrounding plot levels and the preparation of a surface water drainage strategy.

Noise

178. The noise chapter considers the noise impact of the development on nearby sensitive locations. The following noise sources have been taken into account: building services plant; use of the stadium and other commercial/entertainment events; noise intrusion on surrounding sensitive locations and existing and operational noise impacts on proposed sensitive locations and traffic noise.

179. The baseline condition has been surveyed which demonstrates that existing noise levels are dominated by road traffic from roads and low flying aircraft.

180. During construction, increases in noise and vibration are likely to arise due to earthworks and construction of site infrastructure and HGV movements. These effects would be temporary and adverse.

181. During the operational phase noise arising from the building services plant would be of major adverse significance. Mitigation including enhanced glazing and alternative ventilation would compensate these effects. Noise impact from the road traffic noise of the proposed development is considered to be Neutral and not significant. Noise arising from the use of the stadium and entertainment/commercial uses is considered to range from minor adverse effect to natural effect.

Air Quality

182. The Air Quality chapter considers the impacts of the development on air quality, including dust arising from construction, exhaust emissions from vehicles during construction and the operation of the development on local pollution concentrations.

183. Baseline conditions have been established through air quality monitoring.

184. During construction, there is potential for dust nuisance and surface soiling which are temporary, but would be significant. Proposed mitigation includes dust management.

185. During the operational phase there would be a change in nitrogen dioxide levels and particulate matter due to changes in traffic movement. The effects of these changes is considered to be ‘negligible’. Mitigation during this phase includes the aim to increase the number of residents travelling to and from the site. Where trips are made by private vehicles, electric charging points and car clubs could be provided.

Socio Economic

186. The socio-economic chapter explores the socio-economic effects of the proposed development and the impacts of the development on available social infrastructure.

187. A baseline assessment of socio-economic conditions has taken into account the following indicators: population and demographic change; economic change; education and skills; housing; health conditions; deprivation and poverty and crime. Also taken into account is community facilities and open space provision.

188. During the construction phase a number of impacts have been identified. Employment would be generated through the construction, resulting in a temporary beneficial impact of moderate significance. In turn this adds gross value, which would also be a temporary beneficial impact of moderate significance. With construction comes the opportunity for construction training and apprenticeships, which the ES confirms 2020 Developments are committed to providing. This provides a temporary beneficial impact of minor to moderate significance. A New Homes Bonus would be payable to LBC, and is calculated to be £4,895,814 with £815,969 in year 1. This provides a temporary beneficial impact of moderate significance. Finally, during construction there would be disruption (in the form of traffic, dust, noise and vibrations), arising from the build programme lasting a number of years. The ES concludes this would cause a temporary adverse impact of moderate significance.

189. Permanent socio-economic effects have been identified, including demand on GP and dentists (concluded to cause a permanent adverse impact of minor significance); demand for school places (a permanent adverse impact of moderate significance); Council Tax contributions (permanent beneficial impact of moderate significance); household expenditure (permanent beneficial impact of moderate to major significance); match day spending (permanent beneficial impact of moderate significance); revenue from business rates (permanent beneficial impact of moderate significance); permanent employment (permanent beneficial impact of major significance); gross value (permanent beneficial impact of major significance); training and skills development opportunities (permanent beneficial impact of minor to moderate significance); and social effects in the form of opportunities for young people to take part in football and recreational activities (permanent beneficial impact of moderate significance).

190. In summary, of the temporary effects, three are concluded to be beneficial and of the 11 permanent effects, seven would be beneficial.

Geotechnical and Land contamination

191. The geotechnical and land contamination chapter considers the impact of the development on ground and groundwater conditions and is based on the findings of the Phase 1 Ground Condition Assessment.

192. The site is underlain by Alluvium, comprising clay, silt, sand and gravel.

193. Current and previous land uses have been considered as having the potential to create contamination, including (amongst others) a coal- powered electricity generating station, boiler works, electricity sub-station, historic coal depot area and disused industrial and commercial buildings.

194. During construction, activities could disturb, explore or mobilise existing contamination in addition to introducing new potential contamination sources through temporary storage of chemicals. To mitigate, prior to commencement of development, detailed geo-environmental site investigation will be undertaken to assess all potential hazards, following which, remediation would be undertaken. The ES recommends Risk Assessments and Method Statements relating to groundworks which take into account identified contamination. Similarly, a Construction Environmental Management Plan would be prepared to document environmental management procedures during construction.

195. A risk to ground and surface water during construction results from the migration of contaminants during the removal of areas of hard standing. Methods to prevent this include creating piled foundations, which generate pathways for contamination to migrate.

196. During operational phases, the presence of hard standing will limit the potential for direct contact between site users and contamination in soils and groundwater. Mitigation includes the incorporation of a layer of clean soil cover over the areas of soft landscaping, which limits the potential for contaminants to rise to the surface.

Lighting

197. The lighting chapter considers the effect of the required additional lighting on sensitive locations surrounding the site.

198. During construction phases there will be light spill resulting from on-site lighting and construction vehicles, these effects will be temporary and reversible. There would be a moderate significant effect of night sky and glare to adjacent dual carriageways and motorways. Effects on ecological receptors would be major-adverse.

199. During the operational phase, the impact of the development would be negligible on surrounding residential receptors. The impact on the dark sky would be negligible with a predicated sky glow figure of 5%.

200. Mitigation is proposed to ensure there is no significant glare for drives along the rail line in the form of LED lights for proposed access roads and car park lighting and the requirement for the LED lights to be switched off when not required for match play. With this mitigation the impact on glare would be negligible.

201. Daylight/sunlight tests were undertaken to consider the impact of the development on the amount of light received by surrounding residential properties. None of the surrounding receptors failed the 25-degree test and subsequently there would not be a significant effect in terms of daylight.

Wind

202. The wind chapter considers the impact of the development on the local wind microclimate at the site and within the surrounding area. Baseline conditions have been assessed at various locations surrounding the site. To calculate impacts from the development, a 3D model was crated and analysed.

203. During construction the use of hoarding and scaffolding would alter the wind microclimate which makes it difficult to formally assess the effects, but it is considered this would not exceed the effects of the operational phase.

204. During the operational phase the comfort levels of areas surrounding the site were assessed and would not vary significantly as a result of the proposed development.

Energy/Sustainability

205. The energy/sustainability chapter sets out that the development would aim to achieve BREEAM Good with BREEAM pre-assessments submitted to LBC during pre-application discussions.

206. Baseline conditions have been assessed, incorporating accessibility to green and open space and the ecological value of the site. It was determined that there is a deficiency in green space in the local area, and the proposal seeks to overcome this by providing green and open space which would deliver ecological, health and amenity benefits. Ecological benefits are also proposed through the development, with a Biodiversity Action Plan to be prepared, biodiverse roofs, deculverting the River Lea and associated landscaping works.

207. This chapter also considers how the design of the development is water sensitive, with the incorporation of SUDS, the deculverting of the River Lea and a commitment to reduce potable water demand through using water efficient sanitary ware and low demand water landscapes.

208. With regards to energy conservation and carbon reduction, the development would seek to reduce energy by 19%, which is equivalent of Code for Sustainable Homes Level 4. This will be achieved by following the energy hierarchy, incorporating design measures such as low U- values and use of insulation and consideration will be given to the generation of low and zero carbon energy (consideration to be given at the next stage).

209. Consideration has been given to minerals and waste management with the aim to reduce the embodied carbon of the building structure and associated infrastructure. This will be achieved through methods of construction, sustainable procurement of materials and use of recycled materials.

210. Sustainable transport options are also considered, with the Framework Stadium Travel Demand Management Strategy targeting a 10.7% reduction in private vehicle trips. This will be achieved through a stadium car park with numbers below LBC standards and a car sharing club. Furthermore, improvements to cycle infrastructure and pedestrian/cycle infrastructure will be considered further.

Townscape and Visual Impact Assessment

211. The townscape and visual Impact assessment chapter explores the potential townscape and visual effects of the proposed development. Baseline conditions have been established through both desk-top studies and a site assessment, with the study area extending 2km from the site boundary.

212. An assessment of the townscape character has been undertaken, taking into account topography, land use, building height and form, building appearance, landmark buildings, vegetation and public realm.

213. Key impacts during construction include site clearance, works to the existing highways, creation of a site compound, earthworks, building works, construction traffic and inclusion of cranes. During this construction phase, effects would be temporary and adverse, but of minor significance. Close range and medium range views would experience moderate adverse effects with wider views in the context of Luton town centre would experience minor adverse to negligible effects.

214. During the operational phase, a number of aspects have been considered. There are locally enhanced areas of landscape value, associated with the designation of Hart Hill, but this area would not be significantly altered by the proposal.

215. The Plaiters Lea Conservation Area sits close to the site and the impact is considered to be moderate adverse in significance, with an acknowledgement that the townscape character of the conservation area is already impacted by modern development. The impact on St. Mary’s Church, which is listed, would be moderate adverse in significance. The general effect on the character of Luton would be minor and not significant.

216. In order to consider the visual effect on people within the public realm, a number of viewpoints have been considered and typically the effect would be minor adverse and not significant. The chapter also considers the effect on residential (from private views rather than public realm). At worst the impact in considered to be moderate adverse. Finally, the chapter considers the visual effect on traveller with views from road and rail and the effect is of moderate positive significance and the visual effect on workers, which is minor adverse.

217. At night time, the effects would not significantly differ from those of the existing townscape, with the exception of the stadium gantry lighting. The chapter considers this would not vary the assessments as summarised above.

218. Mitigation of the townscape and visual effects is incorporated within the design of the development, including (not exhaustively) the amendments made to the application following consultation responses, opening up of the River Lea to enhance green infrastructure, developing a derelict site and orientation of residential buildings to allow permeability for views.

Cumulative Effects

219. The final chapter of the ES considers the cumulative effects of the development alongside other potential developments in the local area. Each of the topics summarised above have considered the impact of cumulative effects and the majority consider the impact either negligible or beneficial.

ECONOMIC IMPACT

220. It is estimated that the new stadium alone will generate an additional £32.7 - £68.2m of value added from August 2020 to July 2040 (up to £3.4m per year) and up to 83 jobs, depending on the league position, for the local Luton economy over and above the GVA of the existing stadium.

221. These estimates are based on information provided by 2020 Developments (Luton) Ltd. On the detailed plans and financial projections for the new stadium and financial projections for the existing stadium at Kenilworth Road. The range of results reflects scenarios assessed for the football league in which LTFC is playing when it relocates to the proposed new stadium (August 2020).

222. The Club’s aspiration is to be promoted to higher leagues over the next few years; League One and then The Championship. To reflect this aspiration there are three scenarios which were analysed:

1. Scenario 1: LTFC remains in its current football league; League Two. 2. Scenario 2: LTFC is promoted before the stadium move to League One. 3. Scenario 3: LTFC is promoted twice before the stadium move to The Championship.

223. The Analysis considers that it is, of course, possible that the football club could be playing in the Premier League at some time between 2020 and 2040. It is clear that there are many permutations of the leagues in which LTFC could be playing over that period and, clearly, it would be impossible to forecast what will actually happen. Rather than being forecasts of LTFC’s future achievements as a football club, these are simply a range of scenarios to highlight the potential range of results that could arise after a stadium move.

224. The analysis indicates, although the GVA and employment generated can be expected to vary dependent on the Club’s future performance, the uplifts to both are significant in all possible scenarios. In addition to the stadium, 2020 Developments (Luton) Ltd. proposes to develop other new facilities at Power Court. These could add approximately another £455.3m of value to the Luton economy between August 2020 and July 2040 (an average of £22.8m per year) and approximately 793 FTE jobs.

225. These estimates are based on analysis using: i) 2020 Developments (Luton) Ltd.’s detailed plans on the specific types of facilities that it is proposed will be developed and their size; and ii) data from the House and Communities Agency (HCA) Employment Density Guide 3rd edition 2015.

226. The economic impact of the proposed additional developments at Power Court will spread beyond the Luton area. The analysis also suggests that the economic activity generated will be significantly higher than currently proposed, albeit uncertain, alternative uses for the site.

227. The analysis compares the economic activity from the proposed Power Court development with the economic activity from the current football stadium (which generates a positive, but smaller, GVA than the proposed new stadium) and the current Power Court site (which is derelict and currently generates no value added) would overstate the benefits of the 2020 Developments (Luton) Ltd. proposals.

228. This is identified for two reasons. Firstly, although the Power Court site is currently unused, it is unlikely to remain so. At some point, it might be redeveloped for an alternative use that will generate economic activity. For that reason, the economic benefits of the new football stadium and ancillary services at Power Court need to be compared against the economic benefits that will be generated from next best option. It is surmised that this will reduce the incremental GVA and employment estimates from those shown above.

229. It is evident that the redevelopment will, on whatever assessment, or analysis, result in the redevelopment of a vacant site which contributes very little to the local economy. There can be no doubt that the redevelopment would increase economic value and provide jobs beyond that which the football club already contributes to the local economy

URBAN DESIGN AND IMPACT ON THE TOWN CENTRE,

Design assessment and impacts

230. Whilst the application is in outline form, and design is not a matter for consideration development parameters and indicative plans have been provided. It is important that the matter of design is addressed. DAS

(i) The stadium

231. The stadium itself is a very large structure, within the scheme the equivalent of four to seven storeys in height, above podium. It will be a long roofed building visible from all parts of the locality, with flat roof element at the sides and entry corners, enclosing the stands. Ancillary accommodation is contained within the overall mass and influences the appearance and silhouette. It will lie at the heart of a cluster of tall buildings and these, together with floodlighting halo will result in glimpse views of the stadium which will be visible, particularly when viewed from the surrounding area.

232. The design of the stadium is inevitably informed by its function, use and character. The surrounding residential buildings and hotel will be more prominent as a group, since they would be higher than the bulk of the stadium, albeit that the DAS indicates that the east stand would provide a visual linkage in terms of height with the adjoin developments. There being a variation of 12 metres along the eastern built form.

233. This layout has advantages in as much that the location of the stadium amongst new buildings in a tight site avoids the blandness and starkness associated with many new stadium developments that often sit in large open areas surrounded by car parking, with little activity except for match days. The stadium would not appear visually isolated because of the route permeability. Additionally the main entrance provides a clear sense of place. The position of the main access route, and triangular shape provides a natural focus of the Stadium.

234. The siting of the main entrance and interaction of the ground floor activities (club bar, shop, turnstiles) with the other commercial uses proposed to the ground floor of the residential buildings is appropriate, as these uses and the new public space between them, will provide a liveliness and sense of place that would help create an identity for the development. The design-parameters for the residential blocks need to ensure that space for views towards the main entrance can be accommodated to aid legibility for pedestrians. A condition will need to be imposed to ensure finished floor levels comply with those set out in the DAS.

235. Whilst the details have been provided an indication of the design concept these details will need to be addressed by a condition. Details of materials will also need to be provided, it is recommended both the materials and detail of finishes to the stadium and the concourse level floor/s and Blocks A to H be the subject of conditions.

236. Overall the stadium building would have an acceptable design that would add a distinctive structure to the area. Officers are content that the conditions proposed would ensure that the impact is sufficiently mitigated, though if unsatisfactory details were submitted pursuant to this condition consent would be able to be withheld until they were acceptable. Ancillary uses within the stadium are found throughout each stand but are focussed in the main west and east stands. This is logical given that the west is the main stand building, the intention is to include hospitality boxes in the east stand together with a Gym track on the concourse.

237. The new stands, concourse, spectator and player facilities have all be designed to meet the latest safety and sporting standards and are fully accessible, and will provide a high quality sport facility. Therefore subject to the safeguarding conditions recommended to ensure high quality finishes.

(ii) The public realm

238. Policy LLP25 seeks to provide ensure that both buildings and spaces will be of high quality. In this context the proposals seek to develop and enhance the public realm, creating safe, legible and attractive spaces. Other LP policies including LLP31 – Sustainable Transport Strategy encourage cycling and walking also support public realm improvements.

239. The spaces surrounding the stadium and housing are very important in creating character and ensuring the layout is integrated with surrounding uses, is permeable and enhances access to public transport, green infrastructure and local communities as recommended by Policy LLP25.

240. The application proposes work to improve the public realm along the length of St Marys Road, and to create Vicarage Walk. This would enhance the public realm in close proximity to St Marys Church. Other works to create the stadium concourse, and provide a public realm with active frontages, which will link into the town and the wider area would be achieved.

241. These works would significantly enhance the existing poor-quality environment along St Marys Road and would create a new public realm around the stadium, the latter providing new paving, street tree planting, and lighting should help link the site to the places of interest to the north and south. These improvements would help make St Marys Road a more attractive part of the public realm, as well as complementing other improvements resulting from new buildings, activity and landscaping.

242. A ramp arrangement is proposed in the concourse area to the north of the stadium, the gradient of the ramp meets disabled access requirements, and the main exit from the stadium is indicated to the north east of the stadium. The primary benefit of this arrangement is its direct access to the Station which will facilitate crowd movement, though marshalling security features and satisfactory will be necessary.

243. The stadium concourse areas and public realm areas, whilst although providing functional space for football crowds, gives an opportunity to create new public realm. These areas need to be both durable and attractive and the DAS indicates that good quality landscaping is proposed. The proximity of the housing blocks to the stadium avoids sparse areas that would be stark and uninviting, but does add to the overall sense of being built up, with the finer detail of the materials and planting being very important to provide some human scale and distinctiveness to avoid these spaces appearing overwhelmed by the adjacent buildings. Conditions requiring further details to secure details of public realm works are recommended.

244. In summary, the development will enhance and create new public realm, improving links between the site and its surrounds, helping to create areas of new neighbourhood and complementing the new community infrastructure. Despite the proposed block buildings, Power Court would become a significantly more pleasant space with more greenery and activity proposed, contrasting with its present industrial nature.

245. Further details are needed to maximise the quality and legibility of the spaces, to help reinforce local character and accessibility, with these to be secured through the Design Code and conditions and will be the subject of reserved matters. The DAS provides comfort that these areas would be high quality and suitable for both match and non-match day use. In this regard the concourse areas and footpaths are indicated with high quality, durable landscaping that has a good amount of detail and infrastructure without compromising the flow of large numbers of people when in full use. It is noted that the stadium design has fully accounted for crowd arrival and dispersal. The detailed arrangements will need to be covered in the various management and operational plans to be agreed with police oversight.

(iii) The housing

246. The proposed housing is provided in a series of blocks (8) located around the Stadium, 6 to the north and 2 to the south. The scheme is high density, which is encouraged by Policy LLP15. The impact of the housing design on the quality of the scheme itself, the townscape of the immediate environs of the site, and how it appears from areas outside of the site are, in addition to ensuring good transport, infrastructure provision and acceptable impacts on neighbouring residents, key to determining whether the buildings are satisfactory.

247. The proposed residential blocks are 5 – 8 storeys in height, above podium. As described previously the lower storey buildings are on the northern and southern boundaries. The variation is 12 metres in height from the northern and southern boundaries respectively. The site has distinct physical boundaries, as described previously, namely to the south the dual carriageway of Crawley Green Road, to the north and west Church Street and to the east the Luton Dunstable Busway. The site is arguably detached from its neighbouring uses and development. The sections provided indicate that the proposed development is compatible and consistent with the existing skyline.

248. Accordingly, the development in this respect would not result in significant harm to sensitive places including conservation areas, the setting of listed buildings, or open space. It is considered that the blocks do they relate to their surrounds, the site is large enough includes adequate space for landscaping and minimise impacts on neighbours. Whilst the application is in outline the applicant will need to ensure that the development in general and the buildings in particular are of a high quality design with acceptable impacts on important views. These medium height residential buildings may be considered appropriate as this would optimise reuse of brownfield land.

249. There is also the point, of course that for a building to be tall it does not make the design poor. The site is a town centre location, and in this the taller building blocks, in this major redevelopment schemes will optimise the reuse of land and economic potential, additionally, such features might also aid legibility of the townscape, acting as landmarks that help identify a point of civic or visual reference. The residential blocks are part of a comprehensive scheme, including a football stadium, which will promote regeneration and secure other planning gains. Additionally, character is about more than height, bulk and appearance, it is about distinctiveness, uses, people and communities and how places are connected.

250. Character is also not static, it is dynamic, with change over time being a fundamental feature of a developing urban environment. The proposed buildings, are part of an application which is in outline only, with the details provided indicating the parameters through illustrative material, and in particular the DAS.

251. The DAS, provides adequate information to determine whether there are potential harmful impacts from the height and scale of the proposed buildings. To provide further reassurance in respect of the quality of the future detailed design.

(iv) The Site Layout

252. The site’s physical characteristics have been set out previously. The scheme includes 8 buildings (upto 550 dwellings), and a football stadium. The uses set out in the Development Parameters also provide for, an entertainment, music and conference venue (D 2 use upto 2700 sq. m), educational/community/ commercial floorspace (D1/B1(a) upto 2800 sq. m); other entertainment uses (D1/D2; upto 2600 sq. m); hotel accommodation (C1, upto 12000 sq. m); retail, food and beverage (A1 - A5 uses; upto 10800 sq. m); a foodstore (A1, 3000 sq. m) and associated access, highways and public realm, landscaping, riverworks and other associated works and structures.

253. The development involves a substantial number of uses, all of which are focussed round the provision of the stadium. The illustrative layout provides an indication of the uses. Ground level would accommodate the Music venue, the retail foodstore, and some A1 – A5 uses and car parking. Level 1 car parking and some A1 – A5 uses. Level 2, A1 – A5 uses and education/medical facilities, Level 3, Mezzanine, A1 – A5, and education/medical facilities. Levels 4 to 6, residential uses. The location of the hotel element is not at this stage identified.

254. Sometimes clustering of tall buildings helps to limit wider impacts, focussing them to a particular area. In this case the indicative relationship gives the site context. This highlights the shape of the site and intentionally reduces the impact. Because the site is vacant, and has been so for some time, the magnitude of change to the built form will be more obvious, than otherwise might have been the case, particularly as the proposal introduces buildings of a much greater scale, height and bulk than the existing development.

255. That said the development is within the existing town centre, and will be situated adjacent to Mall and building of scale, to the extent that the urban grain is characterised by large blocks. The height of the buildings is comparable with some of the buildings in the immediate surroundings. This is demonstrated by the sections provided.

256. Within the site the environment is constrained by the Luton busway and railway lines, and the existing highway arrangements. Given this backcloth the stadium, with the concourses and the public realm arrangements in general will deliver a character which will feel congested and very urban. Maximising the width of pedestrian areas and the provision of street trees and greenery will be very important in creating a pleasant streetscene. Taking advantage of existing changes in ground level to provide much of the proposed car parking below street level will allow active frontages from entrances and shops next to footpaths, though further detail on relative levels to confirm a seamless transition between the pavement and ground floor is necessary to correctly achieved these relationships and help create a sense of place and the activity, will add vibrancy.

257. Accordingly, provided the public realm is finished with durable, attractive and finely detailed designs, the tight arrangement of buildings in the layout could help create distinctive precinct within the site. At lower levels imaginative architecture may be expressed, and with the ground floor activity provide some human scale that would help offset the sheer scale of the stadium which sits at the heart of the site, as an “Urban Square”.

258. The layout indicates the provision of both communal and private open space the public open space comprises all of the public realm, including the River Corridor, the accessible podium are over the foodstore at Level 3, and the Power Court Piazza. The private open space will provide between the residential blocks. The areas proposed are of a good size and they would be likely to receive adequate sunlight at various times throughout the day. The ES has considered wind microclimate impacts from the development and found impacts to be acceptable for users of the spaces adjoining the buildings (with this matter discussed in detail later).

259. Semi-private spaces amongst the housing units should also provide areas where there can be quiet enjoyment contrasting with the stadium activity outside. This could be achieved, subject to management, by dedicating parts of the access floor which would have insufficient privacy to be a home.

260. Policy LLP25 promotes opportunities designing out crime, and requires, therefore proposals to take account of the principles of Safer Places and Secured by Design. The detailed design will need to clearly mark private and public spaces and incorporate appropriate security features and be well managed. A benefit of the scheme’s density is it will provide good natural surveillance of public spaces whilst the mix of uses will maximise activity during non-matchdays, reducing risk of crime and contributing to a sense of security.

261. On the basis of the foregoing the proposed development result will result in the intense use of the site and this is reflected in the density and built form of the proposal. However, within the site which is well connected to public transport, and noting that minimum housing quality standards will be achievable, a mix of uses is proposed at street level, and there are significant public realm enhancements and additions with the potential to achieve more, the scheme has the opportunity to create its own character. With conditions and the requirement of a Design Code to focus the final design in order to achieve high quality architecture and suitable accommodation, the scheme’s impacts on the site itself are acceptable.

(v) Impacts on the character of surrounding areas

262. As the policy framework discussed above sets out, the development cannot be considered in isolation. Despite the site itself not being sensitive, other than as a vacant brownfield site the space, the height and siting of the buildings will mean they are visible from surrounding areas, some of which are sensitive. From a distance, the buildings will need to have some overriding rationale for their siting.

263. Once detail of styles are produced, these could include elements of character or appearance related to a more industrial past. Indeed the illustrative design concept, relies on a link with the Boroughs hat making past. The matter of materials, and use therefore is key to the delivery of an attractive development, to ensure that the requirement of LLP25 is met, namely that the distinctiveness and character of the area is enhanced, and that the development creates an attractive safe accessible place. This should be influenced by the design integrity and structural logic necessary to design buildings that look right over their full proposed height.

264. The extended shape of the site assists its impacts on surrounding areas to vary, whilst the sensitivity to change and the acceptability of such change of the surrounds also varies. The DAS provides details of the design concept, and details the evolution of the design having regard to the context of the proposed development of the site.

265. Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act says that in considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed building or its setting, the authority shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses. Historic England confirmed that paragraph 196 of the NPPF is relevant to the application proposals.

266. Construction impacts – Construction impacts on surrounding areas will be neutral or negligible for many areas. However to minimise the impact, mitigation of the visual impacts would involve site management practices such as:

• Erection of hoardings around the site to screen construction activity • Control of lighting to minimise upward and outward light pollution • Control of construction hours • Locating compounds and stockpiles in the least visible locations within the site • Limiting movements of material between stockpiles

267. Floodlights – Policy LLP38 addresses the matter of pollution and confirms that the policy covers, inter alia, light. The policy requires the submission of evidence to ensure that there is no significant adverse impact caused as consequence of the scheme.

268. In this respect it is important to take into account of the effect on the character and amenity of the surrounding area. In this instance the principle concern is related to the stadium arrangements. Dealing first with the remainder of the site, since the site is located in an urban area in close proximity the lighting within the communal area and the Piazza are unlikely to give rise to any significant adverse pollution. However it is intended to address this matter by the imposing of a condition.

269. Turning now to the matter of the football stadium, and the proposed floodlighting, it is proposed to deal with this by the use of a halo arrangement which will illuminate the pitch and internal stadium. The matter of lighting is covered in the ES, and there is reference to same in the preceding narrative.

270. The pitch would be floodlit for most football games in the late afternoon and evening. The floodlights would be designed and installed to concentrate light onto the ground. It is appreciated light pollution can be a major annoyance and should be considered carefully in the design. The lighting systems have been designed to ensure there is no light spill and could be a feature of the roofscape. Apart from light spill, glare is also considered to be a nuisance, particularly in intrinsically dark areas. This site is currently a “dark area” but sits amid a heavily built up area, with major roads and multi-storey town centre buildings adjacent; and impacts on the character of the area and wildlife from the intermittent use is considered negligible.

271. It is submitted by the Applicant that the use of LED lighting will obviate any glare, and spillage into the surrounding area. The ES chapter concludes that there would be no harm, and the consultation response received supports this proposition. Further details on the matter of lighting in this respect will be covered by a condition. On this basis this element of the proposed development would not offend Policy LLP38.

(vii) Mitigation

272. As the housing blocks are outline, full details of the scale, appearance and layout are to be submitted for approval. As a result it is not possible to know how the buildings will appear, although the development parameters, and the illustrative documents do provide an indication as to layout and scale and mass.

273. A Design Code will be provided, as a condition requirement, to guide the detailed architectural form and treatment of the blocks. Conditions are recommended in respect of external finishes, materials, hard and soft landscaping, and the public realm will assist in producing a high quality design and significantly reduce the final visual impact of the development. The Design Code and future designs will be able and should be encouraged to mitigate height and bulk, through providing articulation and modelling to the buildings and incorporating materials that complement the character of the local townscape and are recessive rather than intrusive in effect. Given the scale of development to be accommodated, it is essential that part of the design process should include recommendations so that within development and design parameters careful consideration is given to the design of the mass and shape. It is also important that surface treatments should be robust and reflective of the materials and former industrial character of the immediate environs.

Conclusion

274. From the above discussion and review of the ES it is clear that the development will have positive impacts on the existing townscape. The scale of the development would not be out of character with the surrounding development and the proposed use of the site will deliver this redundant brownfield site. Taken overall and with the density and height, these factors would all together, produce a more continuous mass as a skyline. The development would enhance the appearance of the area providing significant new areas of attractive public realm, assisting in connecting the site to its surrounds and improving permeability with the adjoining areas. The stadium itself, although a large structure, would add a unique building to the area, which adds to the local distinctiveness and character and cultural heritage of the area. The impact of the proposed development on the Heritage assets has been considered, and the advice of the Consultees is that the development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset(s). Accordingly it is for the Council to determine if the harm to the asset is outweighed against the public benefits of the proposal. On the basis that the Council consider that there will be significant benefits, to which reference has been made previously made under the heading of “Principle of Development” . 275. At a broad level the development of housing on a brownfield site within an established urban area can be considered to be sustainable; however, it will need to be assured that the proposed development, in particular the residential element, meets a high level of sustainability and conditions would ensure the buildings would meet current standards in respect of energy efficient building requirements. Where additional environmental features could be provided to increase the net benefit, this should be designed so that their additional impact, for example, in visibility or distracting appearance can be assessed. In this instance the Design Code, should identify the nature and use of quality materials and finishes and the details of the public realm works. On the basis of the foregoing the development is consistent with Policies LLP1, LLP25 and LLP38 of the adopted Local Plan.

ARCHAEOLOGY

276. The NPPF and Policy LLP 30 emphasise that the conservation of archaeological interest is a material consideration in the planning process. Paragraph 189 of the NPPF says that applicants should submit desk- based assessments, and where appropriate undertake field evaluation, to describe the significance of heritage assets and how they would be affected by the proposed development. If archaeological safeguards do prove necessary, these could involve design measures to preserve remains in situ or where that is not feasible archaeological investigation prior to development.

277. The site has already been part of a desk top assessment which has identified no ‘significant’ adverse effects (during either construction or operational activities) upon the cultural heritage resource. These details are set out in the ES. Further safeguarding on this matter would addressed by a condition to ensure that there is a watching brief that would oversee further investigations once the site is free of development and construction activity begins.

STADIUM OPERATION AND IMPACTS

278. A material consideration is an assessment of the Stadium to ensure impacts from the stadium’s operation, including access and egress are acceptable and safe, with disturbance of other uses and neighbours minimised.

279. The layout of the development includes housing in close proximity to the stadium. The stadium would be used for football for 26-28 games a year, with most taking place on Saturday afternoons (typically 3:00pm kick off), and up to six on a Tuesday evening (typically 7:45pm kick off). At other times it would accommodate the management offices of LTFC, and also accommodate offices for the LTFC Community Sports Trust. On non- match days the stadium’s function rooms and hospitality facilities would be available for commercial use such as for conferences.

1. Matchday Use

280. There are concerns about the impacts of large crowds, including the influx of non-residents to the area and the associated potential for anti-social behaviour, hooliganism, property crime, safety hazards, noise and general overcrowding, and disruption of access within the town.

281. The proposal would significantly increase the capacity of LTFC compared to its existing ground (extra 12927), and would allow it to cater for larger numbers of away supporters. Consequently, if used to capacity, larger numbers of people would be coming and going in the area, with the relocation shifting activity to new areas not previously subject to significant impacts from a football stadium. This would create both real and perceived impacts on local residents, primarily through disruption on match-days from crowds using public transport such as trains and buses, using footpaths, and additional parking demand. Other impacts such as litter, noise, and use of outdoor areas and public houses are also likely.

282. Some impacts are inevitable with large crowds, and although the disruption would be limited to match days and temporary in nature, without satisfactory management they would potentially have negative effects on residents, and could disrupt use of the Piazza.

283. The major impacts expected are discussed below, and detailed traffic and transport effects are dealt with separately later in the report.

(i) Safety

284. Safe use of the stadium for spectators and people nearby is governed by a raft of Non-planning requirements and legislation. LTFC presently play football less than a mile away and are subject to various licensing, policing and management controls from the Football League, with stadium safety certified under the Safety of Sports Ground Act 1975 and spectator standards regulated under the Football Spectators Act 1989. A similar regulatory regime would apply to the new stadium, though being all-seater, it would be compliant with requirements for the Championship division, unlike Kenilworth Road, which includes an area of terracing which is presently not allowed in higher divisions. The local authority is responsible for issuing and enforcing a safety certificate.

285. A safety certificate would be issued following assessment of compliance with standards and guidance for capacity, management, circulation, seating, access, fire safety, communications, medical and first aid provision, services, media provision and other uses within the stadium. Other regulatory controls including Building Regulations and Fire Safety also apply. It is noted that the stadium design will have to be rigorously tested to demonstrate compliance with relevant standards. In any event the stadium cannot be used without the necessary certification and so safety is able to be satisfactorily addressed through other controls.

(ii) Access

286. At full capacity there will be 23,000 people on the site, arriving from all directions and travelling by a variety of modes of transport. Careful design and management is necessary to ensure disruption to local transport networks and neighbouring residential areas. Turnstiles and entrances are provided at efficient access and egress, and to minimise number of points around the stadium, with these areas linked via the stadium concourse. The DAS provides the basis of accessibility providing illustrative turnstile and access arrangements.

287. Fuller impacts on transport modes and routes are discussed below, but once people are at the site their movement would be satisfactory, within the concourse areas providing new public realm where people can move safely across the site, A management plan, prepared in concert with other statutory bodies will be necessary to administer the site on match and function days.

(iii) Noise

288. Policy LLP38 identifies the effects of noise from a development as being a pollutant, and consequently seeks to minimise noise pollution. During football matches there would be likely to be some occasional crowd noise (cheering etc.) and from the PA system that could be heard outside the stadium including at neighbouring residential areas and major outdoor spaces. This noise would be intermittent and would take place only on match-days (up to 26-28 days per year). It would not take place during early mornings or late evenings, and occurs in an area that has some other noise from road and aircraft traffic, as well as occasional outdoor events that generate noise. (e.g. outdoor concerts) It is also a fact that Kenilworth Road is located in a residential area, and that the current proposals would mitigate this impact.

289. Conditions limiting the use and number of events are proposed to minimise impacts. Therefore this is not considered to be unduly harmful to the usability of outdoor spaces near the ground or the living conditions of the potential residents in the locality. As stated Kenilworth sits amongst terrace housing in closer proximity to any of the existing residential areas near the site and is able to operate without undue impacts on the living conditions of neighbours from noise and disturbance. The stadium design has attempted to maximise the amount of noise retained inside the stadium to enhance the atmosphere. Residents of the new dwellings would need to close windows during matches to meet relevant noise standards but the intermittent noise is not considered to significantly affect liveability of the flats and occupants of these flats would be choosing to live next to the stadium and the impacts are for a relatively short duration.

(iv) Crime and anti-social behaviour

290. In respect of football related crime, LTFC operates at Kenilworth Road amicably alongside residential properties that adjoin three of its four sides. Crime statistics show that the area containing Kenilworth Road has no greater crime levels than other surrounding areas despite the presence of large numbers of football fans.

2. Stadium Management Plan

291. To ensure the stadium functions well, with efficient access and egress, and to minimise disruption to activities and living conditions of non- spectators and residents in the area, extensive management on match- days is proposed.

292. The application does not include a Stadium Management Plan (SMP), and such a document is required to oversee the safe operation and management of impacts from the use of the stadium. The SMP would manage public safety, crime prevention and local traffic and parking management related to the use of the stadium. Other such examples have five elements as follows:

• Operations Plan – Led by the Bedfordshire Police. Its purpose is to manage crowds and traffic movements outside the stadium. This plan will be prepared by the Police in consultation with LTFC and organisations responsible for the transport network (Network Rail).

• Events Management Plan – Required prior to issue of a Safety Certificate it would need licensing approval from the Council and the Sports Ground Safety Authority.

• Local Area Management Plan (LAMP) – Led by LTFC, but would be developed in consultation with LBC, Police, railway providers and local amenity groups. It aims to ensure public safety through defining the primary pedestrian network for movement to and from the stadium and managing its use. It would cover many functional issues such as post match litter collection and street cleaning, marshalling of supporters awaiting transport and along key access routes, match day signage, maintenance of access to transport etc. for non-football users, communication with residents, liaison with local public houses, and information for stadium users. One key part of the LAMP would be a spectator retention strategy, which would aim to keep people inside the stadium after matches so as to allow crowds to disperse at a more regular rate. This could be achieved through promotions, interviews, hospitality and information on transport conditions.

• Stadium Travel Plan – Led by LTFC, it aims to maximise use of sustainable transport to the stadium on match days, and would be secured by a condition.

• Monitoring Programme – This would monitor the outcomes of use of the stadium and evaluates how effect measures to minimise harmful impacts have been such as the levels of public transport use, complaints etc.

293. The Operations and Events Management Plans are required separately from the planning process. This SMP would be similar to arrangements for other sports stadia

3. Non-match days

294. The stadium would be used on non-match days by BFC management and the associated community uses, offices of the LTFC and other community bodies. These operations would ensure activity on non-match days, the uses operating during normal business hours. They are not expected to have significant effects on the environment.

295. Other possible non-match day uses for the stadium facilities include use of hospitality areas for functions and conferences in order to generate income for the club and make full use of the stadium. This use would be ancillary to the stadium’s football use and would not be of a scale likely to generate excessive impacts on the surrounding area noting there is some parking for the stadium on site.

Conclusion

296. The provision of the stadium, with its capacity for 23,000 spectators, would be likely to result in some disturbance and disruption of the local area, including residents of nearby areas. Such impacts are however intermittent, with them occurring on match days only. LTFC currently operates nearby within a tight urban environment, albeit at a smaller scale, without significant trouble. Comprehensive management of match day operations covering all aspects of the stadium’s use, including transport, safety, access, and policing will be necessary. The overarching Stadium Management Plan, which would be similar to similar arrangements for other stadia in urban areas such as Arsenal, Chelsea and Fulham is appropriate and would adequately control most impacts. However despite such measures to minimise concerns, there would be some unavoidable inconvenience and disruption from large crowds being introduced to areas that formerly did not experience such impacts. Where this is the case, the temporary, intermittent nature of the impacts should be balanced against overall benefits of the development and in this regard it is concluded retention of LTFC in the area, and securing its long term survival is considered to be of wider benefit.

TRAFFIC AND PARKING

Transport Assessment

297. The NPPF includes a core principle on the need to actively manage patterns of growth to make the fullest possible use of public transport, walking and cycling, and focus significant development in locations that can be made sustainable. It requires all developments that would generate significant levels of movement to be supported by a Transport Assessment and says that development should only be prevented or refused on transport grounds where the residual cumulative impacts of development are severe.

298. Paragraph 109 of the NPPF states that “development should only be prevented or refused on highway grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety, or the residual cumulative impact on the road network would be severe”.

299. Policy LLP31 provides the policy context for transportation matters. The policy aims to ensure traffic generated by development provides a sustainable opportunity and does not prejudice the free and safe movement of pedestrians, cyclists, public transport services or existing traffic by providing congestion on the traffic network.

300. The Transport Assessment submitted addresses both match day and non- match day impacts, and accounts for cumulative impacts from other committed development schemes in the locality. The transport impact of the development has been in considered in some detail with the Applicant’s Transport consultant and the there are no objections raised to the findings of the TA.

301. The matter of transport was the subject of the ES, where in it was found as follows; “Overall, it can be concluded that the Proposed Development can be satisfactorily accommodated on the transport network and is compatible with the receiving environment. Adoption of travel demand management measures and proposed mitigation will ensure that the impacts on the local and strategic highway network are further mitigated to the satisfaction of the Club and the responsible authorities”.

302. In respect of the stadium, it is sustainably located and would offer modal choice to users of the location which is consistent with the strategic objectives of Policy LLP31. There would be opportunities for rail, bus, road, cycle and pedestrian travel. The illustrative plan, indicates the access arrangement to the complex however detailed circulation arrangements will be comprised within the reserved matters applications. There will need to be the submission of a travel plan, as well as the stadium management plan to which reference has been previously made. . 2. Match days

303. The applicant has assessed the impact of a football matches, based on the capacity of 23,000, and as such is a ‘worst case’ scenario. Data from the club’s supporter records has been used to inform the assessment. However, there is no assessment of any other uses such as concerts, so any permission would be conditioned to allow only football use, as trip patterns and timings from other events would vary from that which has been assessed. It is noted further information in respect of transport was submitted in accordance with Regulation 22 of the EIA.

304. The total number of home matches scheduled to be played is 26-28 depending on cup progression, with the majority on Saturday afternoons (commencing at 3:00pm and ending at around 5:00pm. Around 4 home weekday games are usually scheduled (7:45pm to 9:45pm). Progression in cup competitions or postponement of fixtures, could lead to extra games being played on weekdays. The arrival/departure pattern of weekday fixtures is likely to be less spread out as people attend games after work. The arrivals are also likely to coincide with the end of the PM network peak when people are returning from work.

305. Based on surveys of existing supporters and away fans at various games and modelling, and based on a do something approach, which assumes a linear approach, with a full Travel Demand Management Strategy in place, on this basis the mode of transport for the maximum of 23,000 spectators is expected to be as follows:

Mode Share

Car Driver 21.60% Car Passenger 13.20% Motorbike 0.20% Cycle .0.10% Walk 11.40% Rail 25.89% Bus (Public) 7.30% Bus (Supporter Shuttle) 14.30% Busway 6.10%

Total 100%

306. The assessment predicts 11.4% of spectators would walk to the stadium from the local area, but also estimates that the majority of other spectators would walk for part of their journey (from public transport or to car parking) meaning that there would be large numbers of pedestrians before and after matches. The improvements to the public realm will assist in pedestrian movement, and encourage use of the bus way and rail links.

307. Such impacts are disruptive but occur around other larger stadiums found in urban areas. However, it has to be considered that the modal split currently prevailing at Kenilworth Road is 40% use the car to attend matches. The projected modal split for Power Court would be an improvement in sustainability.

308. The improvement to pedestrian routes outside of the site would also accommodate significant crowds. With LTFC looking to provide an element of match day car parking on site and other park and ride facilities all of these measures through the Framework Car Park Management Plan, will assist in reducing match day congestion. Encouragement will also be given to cycles which will be assisted by the improved public realm.

309. The impacts on nearby pedestrian routes will, despite management, be substantial for a temporary period, but they are not so disruptive that day to day living in those areas is harmed to a significant degree as these conditions would only occur for the short period following the immediate discharge of crowds on match days. Given the short duration of the impact and its intermittent occurrence, and subject to appropriate management of surrounding streets through the LAMP in cooperation with the Police, to ensure people stay on designated routes and proceed safely, the disruption, is on balance considered acceptable, given positive impacts of the stadium.

310. On non-match days it is not anticipated that there would be any detrimental impact on the highway network.

(ii) Rail

311. The site benefits from excellent connections to the Midland Mainline providing direct access to the National Rail network. The station, services and car parking are operated Govia Thameslink Railway (GTR) who provides services at Luton under the brand name of Thameslink.

312. Luton Interchange rail station has five platforms, a ticket hall and a new multi storey car park with 729 spaces (Midland Road Car Park). Access to the station is from either Station Road or Midland Road via a pedestrian over bridge. The station has 5 automatic ticket barriers. 62 cycle parking spaces are provided.

313. The station is located approximately 250m from Power Court can be accessed in approximately 6 minutes on foot to the west of the site with direct and continuous footway provision connecting the site to station via Church Street and Station Road with a controlled pedestrian crossing provided across Church Street at the Church Street-Station Road junction and a zebra crossing across Station Road. Luton Airport Parkway Station is located approximately 1.2km from Power Court and can be accessed in approximately 20 minutes on foot to the east with direct and continuous provision connecting the site to the station via St Mary’s Road, Windmill Road and A505 Gipsy Lane. Controlled crossing points are provided across Crawley Green Road (puffin) facilitating safe and expeditious pedestrian movements east from the site with wide, well-maintained and continuous footways provide on the northern side of the carriageway illuminated by street lighting providing a direct route to the Parkway station.

314. There is a total of 7 rail services per peak hour are departing Luton Airport Parkway station towards the south, providing access to London. In the northbound direction, 5 services are available in the evening peak hour from Luton Airport Parkway for access to destinations including Bedford, Nottingham, Leeds and Sheffield.

315. The TA notes that Luton Station is to be subject to redevelopment plans that could begin in the next 18 months (from March 2015), new retail options delivered and improved disabled access scheme. Although the latest update advises that the proposals will now fall into Control Period 6 which begins in 2019. The proposals will see the station’s capacity increased, potential gate line widening from 4 turnstiles to 8, stairwell/lift/platform improvements.

316. In this respect, geographically, the site is very close to Luton railway station, which is a 6 minute walk to the Stadium, and to the rest of the development. The site is therefore well located.

317. There is a rail strategy in place which proposes the following arrangements; Stewarding and signage of supporters at the Stadium; Split northbound and southbound supporter flows at Stadium in the direction of the most appropriate Station with opportunity between Luton Interchange and Luton Airport Parkway; and Station Management measures with cross-working between the Club and Bedfordshire Police, British Transport Police, Thameslink to build on existing crowd flow management procedures already in place to oversee major events.

318. The TA examines the impact of match day conditions and concludes “that capacity on the Rail network is not forecast to be exceeded in the pre- match peak hour for a weekend match at Power Court with the inclusion of the ‘Do Minimum’ and ‘Do Something’ travel demand”.

(iii) Buses

319. The closest bus stops to the site are located on either side of St Mary’s Road adjacent to the site. The eastbound stop is flagged with bus shelter, seating and passenger timetables provided. The westbound stop is flagged only. Three additional stops are provided opposite the Power Court Road site access on Church Street approximately 50m from the site boundary. These stops are fitted with flagpoles, shelters, seating and passenger timetables.

320. These bus stops are all located within a 400m distance of the site and therefore comfortably within the ‘desirable’ 400m distance recommended for journeys on foot (CIHT, ‘Providing for Journeys on Foot, 2000) and comfortably within the ‘acceptable’ 800m and ‘preferred maximum’ 1,200m distances recommended.

321. The bus services that serve the existing bus stop on St Mary’s Road, closest to the Power Court site, are as follows; 12, 17, 17B, 19, 19A, 100, 101 and 102. These services use either Hitchin Road or Crawley Green Road as radial routes on their way to the destinations of Stopsley, Wigmore, Stevenage or Hatfield. Luton has a guided busway network which passes due north of the Power Court site. The Luton Dunstable Busway is a transport link that directly connects Houghton Regis, Dunstable, Luton and London Luton Airport.

322. The TA states that the capacity on the busway network is therefore anticipated to be exceeded in the pre-match peak hour for a weeknight and weekend match at Power Court with capacity most constrained for southbound services stopping at Luton Interchange station (-52% for a weekend and -60% for a weeknight match) with shortfalls in passenger carrying capacity of approximately 435 and 502 passengers respectively.

323. The TA, in Assuming a busway bus can accommodate 70 passengers including standing, this equates to a worst case of 7 additional busway services being required to meet the additional passenger demand generated by a full-capacity 23,000 match. This assumes a 23,000 full- capacity attendance and much lower average attendances currently occur at Kenilworth Road. Therefore, any future public transport improvements will need to be realistic and proportionate to supporter needs at Power Court.

324. This matter can be addressed by a Travel and Management Plan, in discussion with the applicant and public transport operators at Reserved Matters stage.

(iv) Pedestrian and Cycling

325. It is considered that the Stadium use would generate the following pedestrian and cycle trips:

 1,468 pedestrian trips in the pre-match peak and 1,872 trips in the post-match peak; and

 13 cycle trips in the pre-match peak and 16 trips in the post-match peak.

326. Further analysis has been undertaken of the potential assignment of pedestrian flows on links in vicinity of Power Court for the pre and post- match periods. To provide a worst case assessment, ‘final mode’ supporter walk trips have been assessed for a ‘Do Something’ scenario weekend match at Power Court assuming a full-capacity 23,000 crowd.

327. Walk trips are presented as ‘final mode’ and therefore inclusive of peak hour ‘main mode’ pedestrian trips (1,468 pre and 1,872 post match), Car Driver ‘main mode’ trips parking in interceptor/rail station car parks and completing the final stage of their journey by rail mode, Rail ‘main mode’ trips.

328. The pedestrian flows generated on links in the vicinity of Power Court are temporary, short-lived and not deemed to be material to the operation of the transport network on a match day. The TA It is acknowledges that some shortcomings existing in the pedestrian network near the site and improvements to widen footways and provided dedicated pedestrian crossing facilities are considered to ensure the network has sufficient carrying capacity to accommodate the spikes in pedestrian demand generated by a full-capacity 23,000 crowd at Power Court.

329. Whilst the TA identifies some works to facilitate improvements to the pedestrian network, it is suggested that further analysis can also be undertaken at the Reserved Matters stage to assess the capacity of the pedestrian network in the site vicinity to accommodate the increase in pedestrian flows forecast from the Stadium use.

330. It is also noted that the Travel Demand Management Strategy considers mitigation that can be considered for future implementation by the Club in partnership with LBC in the event where they are required. This includes match day stewarding and temporary road closures to assist in the swift and expeditious management of pedestrian flows to and from the site as required.

(v) Parking and traffic impacts

331. Parking – The stadium requires 400 spaces on a match day. These spaces will be provided and managed by the Club. These spaces will not be available on an ‘ad hoc’ basis and match day supply will therefore not be exceeded. Parking will be reserved for use by Stadium staff, players, officials, hospitality guests, the Police and broadcasting media. Disabled parking will be provided for 60 spaces, which is consistent with the guidance set out in the Luton Local Plan 2011 – 2031 minimum standards.

332. In so far as off-site supply is concerned match day parking demand will be accommodated through the utilisation of spare capacity within the existing town centre car parking supply as well as at interceptor car parks to be provided on matchdays. This analysis provided by the applicant indicates that the central car parks (Bute Street, Hitchin Road and Silver Street) operate at or close to capacity on a Saturday with the periphery car parks having some limited spare capacity. Data has also been sourced from the privately owned Mall Car Park which is the single biggest car park in Luton (1,620 spaces) and located opposite Power Court.

333. In order to undertake the assessment, a comparison was undertaken with the current arrangement. This shows that a match day at Kenilworth Road only generates an additional 5% parking demand at The Mall in the pre- match peak hour. It also can be seen that the Mall car park is approaching capacity of between1400 - 1500 and there is therefore limited spaces available for supporters on a Saturday. The applicant has advised that in discussions with LBC, that there is significant spare capacity in The Mall car parking on a weeknight pre-match period.

334. Off-street parking provision is also provided at Luton Interchange stations. The applicant advises that via discussions with Thameslink, that the car park is fully occupied during a weeknight pre-match peak hour whilst spare capacity in the region of 30-40% is available on a weekend.

335. As part of this exercise on street parking was also considered, as a consequence of survey this reveals it can be seen that there is spare on- street parking capacity of approximately 34% (3,810 spaces) and 55% (4,973 spaces) in the two hours prior to kick-off on a Weekend and Weeknight match respectively.

336. In addition to the off-site car parking supply available in Luton town centre, the Applicant has indicated that they will seek to provide additional match day car parking in ‘interceptor’ locations on radial routes into the town centre. This arrangement will require contractual agreements to be put into place between the Club and third party landowners which the Club are committed to undertake further to any Outline consent granted. It is envisaged that the Club would enter into a lease agreement with the landowner for the provision of the match day parking proposed. A number of key radial routes into Luton have been identified as suitable locations for future interceptor car parking provision. These could provide approximately 2,000 car parking spaces.

337. In order to address the matter of match day car parking, it is forecast that the level of demand can be accommodated as follows:

Weeknight

 4,900 off-street spaces in Luton town centre;  4,973 - on-street spaces beyond 750m radius of Power Court; and  2,000 spaces potentially in interceptor locations.

Weekend

 3,810 on-street spaces beyond 750m radius of Power Court  2,000 spaces potentially in interceptor locations; and  1,836 spaces at rail station car parks on the Midland Mainline between Bedford and St Albans.

338. Accordingly, it can be seen that weeknight supporter car parking demand can be fully accommodated within the circa 11,873 off-plot car parking spaces anticipated as being available within the town centre off-street parking stock, on-street parking stock beyond a 750m radius of Power Court and at potential interceptor car park locations.

339. Weekend car parking demand for a full-capacity match at Power Court can be largely accommodated within the above car parking stock (approximately 8,257 car drivers versus 7,646 spaces). It is envisaged this minimal level of unmet demand can be met in other locations identified in the 2014 Supporter Travel Survey including ‘At a friend’s or relative’s house’ as well as in a number of other locations outside the scope of this Section that has only assessed the off-site town centre parking supply. There is therefore substantial on-street and retail parking available outside a 2km radius of Power Court which will no doubt be used by supporters attending a weekend match including at the Hatters Way retail park which is served by direct busway services to and from Power Court to meet supporter parking demand.

340. The assessment shows that the site is exceptionally well positioned to enable site users to access the site although at a local level there are limited crossing facilities and unattractive journey times for pedestrian seeking to access the town centre via Church Street, John Street and Guildford Street; The site is extremely well-served by local and strategic cycle network connections that operate between Park Street and a range of local and inter-urban destinations via Park Street and NCN6.

341. The site is extremely well-served by public transport services within a range of bus stops within 100 m of the site boundary served by high- frequency peak hour bus and busway services. National rail services can also be accessed on foot via continuous footways and attractive journey times at Luton Interchange and Luton Airport Parkway rail stations.

342. Future residents will be able to access a range of services and amenities in convenient walking distance of the site, further reducing the need to travel by car. This includes the comprehensive commercial and retail offer within Luton town centre, health care facilities and education facilities.

343. Finally, the road safety accident data provided by Luton Borough Council determined that there are no existing highways issues or accident patterns in the proximity of the proposed access locations off Church Street, the St Mary’s Road–A505 roundabout or Crawley Green Road, and Traffic flows along St Marys Road are significantly lower than the 4 lanes of carriageway could provide for.

3. Match day mitigation

344. A comprehensive package of improvement measures are proposed to minimise the vehicular traffic generation of the site and ensure the site integrates seamlessly with the wider town centre:

 A potential new 2m shared footway/cycleway along the northern site boundary providing a safe and direct route between the site, Station Road and Kimpton Road;

 High-quality pedestrian crossing facilities across Church Street between Guildford Street and John Street;

 New pedestrian crossing facilities across Kimpton Road; Wider improvements along St Marys Road corridor including lane reduction, footway widening along site frontage, de-culverting of the River Lea into a public feature an high-quality public realm;

 Upgrading the two existing bus stops on St Marys Road adjacent to Power Court to incorporate Real Time Information screens;

 Working with operators to provide increased number of Busway services during the pre and post-match peak hour periods;

 Providing dedicated Supporter Shuttle Bus services from Interceptor Car Parks operating for 2 hours before and 1.5 hours after a Power Court match;

 Exploration of coach services to provide demand-responsive services on corridor north/south/east/west of Power Court;

 Extension of CPZ's up to 2 km radius of Power Court to cover matchdays and subject to consultation with affected residents and discussion with LBC; and

 A Framework Car Park Management Plan and Framework Travel Demand Management Strategy considering a range of ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ measures to influence end use travel demand, minimise the traffic generation effects on the local highway network and provide guidance on the long-term monitoring and management approach to guide travel planning at Power Court.

345. Planning obligations – In addition to A Framework Car Park Management Plan and Framework Travel Demand Management Strategy funding for a possible match day Controlled Parking Zone consultation, which if agreed would require further funds for implementation.

Conclusion (match days)

346. The stadium is located in an area with relatively good public transport links, which will reduce the need for spectators to travel by car. The Stadium traffic impacts will be temporary, short-lived and occur relatively infrequently. Including for cup matches, the weekend Stadium car driver scenario is only anticipated to occur 26 times per year whilst a weeknight scenario will only occur approximately 9 times per year.

347. The non-vehicular Stadium use impacts on the bus and rail networks are anticipated to be negligible with sufficient network capacity to accommodate supporter flows. Pedestrian trips are due to be concentrated between Luton Interchange Station, Guildford Street, John Street and the town centre. Guildford Street is anticipated to carry the largest flows in volumes with 7,548 walk trips in during the peak hour post- match period on a weekend assuming a full-capacity 23,000 attendance.

348. When supporter trips are distributed between the various public bus services, most routes experience a modest increase in passenger numbers. However, capacity on the Guided Busway network is forecast to be insufficient to cater for a 23,000 full-capacity crowd at Power Court. Mitigation is proposed in respect with the Applicants working with operators to provide increased number of Busway services during the pre and post-match peak hour periods.

349. Existing public transport modes have been assessed as having adequate capacity to cater for a crowd of 20,000, though services will be very busy around match times.

Non-match days

350. Non-Stadium traffic generation has been forecast using trip rates agreed with the Council which estimate the proposals would generate 391 two- way vehicle trips in the AM Peak and 500 two way vehicle trips in the PM Peak. The highway capacity assessments indicate that whilst the Non- Stadium use development proposals can generally be accommodated on the local highway network, five junctions are forecast to exceed practical capacity at peak times in 2016 and 2021 and prior to the inclusion of development flows to the network.

351. It is therefore concluded that these junctions will continue to operate over capacity with the addition of development flows but the change in flows is not anticipated to significantly worsen. Overall changes in flow across a 24 hour period are demonstrated to be low with all links below the 30% standard Environmental Impact threshold and less than 10%.

352. The increase in total vehicle movements as a consequence of the Proposed Development across the model area is restricted to less than 4% in both peaks in the 2021 scenario. This demonstrates that the Development impact would be limited in area-wide terms.

353. The TA concludes that the impact of development traffic is therefore not deemed to be significant, below Environmental Impact thresholds, and is not anticipated to have a material impact on existing capacity and queuing on the local highway network.

354. To mitigate the impact of the development on the highway network, local highway measures have been proposed at the Kimpton Road mini- roundabout and Hucklesby Way-Church Street junction. These demonstrate that the mitigated, With Development, flows can be accommodated on the local highway network with no significant impacts forecast to occur in the AM or PM peak periods. The reconfiguration of entry lane markings on the Hitchin Road arm is also shown to deliver a nil betterment in PM peak junction performance versus the 2021 Future Base test and with the inclusion of development flows.

355. The capacity assessments have also taken no account of any reduction in car driver trips arising from Travel Plans that will be secured by LBC for the Non-Stadium uses and implemented by future occupiers to manage staff and visitor trips on the network. It could be reasonably expected the lower trip rates than those tested will be realised at Power Court.

(ii) Housing

356. Although the application is in Outline form at this stage, car parking across the development has been determined with consideration to local parking standards, developer aspirations and effective site operations.

357. The non-match day Car Parking Allocation is as follows:

Use Class Parking Spaces Food Retail 214* Stadium 100 Residential 550 Office / Music Venue / Misc / Public 336 Total 1,200

(*1 hour maximum stay on matchdays)

358. The proposed provision accords with standards and reflects the accessibility of the sit whereby residential provision is capped at a maximum of one space per unit, the food retail at maximum standards, the hotel capped at 50 spaces and the stadium uses being provided with a maximum of 100 spaces on non-matchdays. 336 spaces will also be provided for the remaining uses, including the office and music venue, with provision unallocated to ensure a flexible approach is adopted.

359. It is felt that this parking provision allows for a commercially viable scheme but also reflects the objectives of Luton 2020 Developments in that excessive car dependency is not encouraged and a pragmatic approach whereby the site is seen as a sensible and beneficial extension to the town centre. The highway Engineer has not objected to this approach. These details would be secured by conditions and a Car Park Management Plan that addresses phasing and allocation to units. Car parking provision for the Residential use is proposed at 1 space per household (long stay).

360. Given that Car ownership levels for the adjacent High Town Ward assessed indicate that future car ownership levels at Power Court will be in the region of 0.74 cars per household. It can therefore be demonstrated that the parking demand generated by the proposed residential use can be fully accommodated on-plot within the parking quantum proposed.

361. On-plot cycle parking will be provided for short and long stay users in accordance with the Minimum Cycle Parking Standards as set out in the Adopted Luton Local Plan. The quantum of cycle space provision will be the subject of a condition to comply with Policy LLP32Biii - Cycle storage of an appropriate standard is provided for residential developments. It is therefore proposed that residential cycle parking provision be addressed by a condition.

Other uses

362. Car parking provision for the Office / Hotel / Conferencing / Music Venue is proposed at 336 spaces. The land use peaks of the Office / Hotel / Conferencing / Music Venue uses are set out below:

 Office – 0800-0900 AM and 1700-1800 PM;  Hotel – 0800-0900 AM and 1800-1900 PM;  Music Venue – 0000-0100 AM and 2200-2300 PM; and  Conferencing – 0800-0900 AM and 1700-1800 PM.

363. The Office / Hotel / Conferencing land use peak vehicle generation is forecast to generate 37 inbound vehicle trips during the AM Peak. The Office / Conferencing uses are forecast to generate 2 inbound vehicle trips whilst the Hotel use is forecast to generate 21 inbound vehicle trips during the Hotel 1800-1900 land use peak. The Music Venue is forecast to generate approximately 3 inbound vehicle trips during the PM network peak and 0 inbound trips during the AM Peak.

364. A proposed quantum of 336 spaces is therefore envisaged to be adequate to accommodate the levels of traffic generation forecast for the Office / Hotel / Conferencing / Music Venue. In the unlikely occurrence whereby parking demand exceeds on-plot supply, it is envisaged that the off-street parking stock in Luton town centre will be sufficient to accommodate any overspill demand including the 1,620 spaces at The Mall car park and the wider stock of 4,900 public car parking spaces in the town centre.

365. On this basis it is considered that this element of the proposed development does not offend Policy LLP32.

Non-match day mitigation

(i) Travel Plan

366. The highway capacity assessments indicate that whilst the Non-Stadium use development proposals can generally be accommodated on the local highway network, five junctions are forecast to exceed practical capacity at peak times in 2016 and 2021 and prior to the inclusion of development flows to the network.

367. However it is considered that a non-match day Travel Plan should be submitted, with this to have similar objectives and mechanisms as the Stadium Travel Plan, the ultimate aim being to maximise sustainable modes of transport and reduce car use and traffic congestion associated with the development. The Travel Plan would apply to commercial and residential uses. Monitoring of modal splits and impacts would again be independently assessed, with this monitoring to cover 10 years after post occupation of the development. Given the proposed phasing, the Travel Plan itself should be for the lifetime of the development. The plan would include promotion and communications measures, and details of ways to maximise public transport use, cycling and walking.

(ii) CPZ

368. Should the monitoring show relevant targets for car use are not met, then it would be necessary for further measures to be introduced to ensure effects on the road network and also parking in the locality are not harmful. The only option here is introduction of a CPZ to those nearby areas not covered by existing CPZs, which may suffer from overspill parking, should local residents agree, with residents of the proposed development prohibited from obtaining permits. This would be comprised within a Section 106 agreement, which would be CIL compliant.

(iii) Conclusion

369. The non-match day mitigation, will essentially by way of a Section 278 Order under the Highways Act, with other measures achieved by the Travel Plan, which will promote sustainable modes of travel to and from the site.

CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS

370. The development would be comprised of three phases. There is not as yet no indication of the timescale, but these details will be addressed in a phasing plan which would be comprised within a Section 106 Agreement, which would be CIL compliant. In any event, the construction works are likely to result in temporary local disruption to pedestrian, cycle and vehicular traffic, including public transport users for the duration of works owing to demolition and construction traffic. Additionally, owing to the phasing of the development, some resident new residents may also be subject to these potential impacts. Some impacts from such large scale construction are an inevitable consequence of development. Expected construction traffic volumes would have a negligible impact on the wider road network though final details would not be determined until the full details comprised within the reserved matters are submitted.

371. The DAS suggests that there will be three construction phases. Phase 1 will involve the construction of the Stadium, Phase 2 would involve the main Piazza area and the A1 to A5 users, Phase 3 would be the southern part of the site. The derails provide at the outline stage are superficial. The ES concludes that the impact of the construction phase will be temporary, minor adverse and can be mitigated.

372. This site, which is close to the strategic road network, routeing of construction vehicles to avoid disruption is feasible, whilst hours of work, including for deliveries would be limited to reasonable hours, and other environmental controls including access management and wheel washing will further minimise impacts to a satisfactory level. These controls would be secured by conditions requiring a Construction Management Plan (covering methods and routes of delivery), within this document, site management and environmental controls would be included.

Conclusion

373. As the proposal includes a large stadium with ancillary uses, a hotel, and up to 550 dwellings, it would clearly result in additional use of nearby public transport and traffic and parking on adjacent roads by new residents and visitors to the site, including for football matches, the latter to attract up to 20,000 people. The site has a good number of public transport options available for use, including bus and rail. In terms of public transport accessibility this site is preferable to the existing ground. The development looks to maximise use of sustainable transport modes, by limiting stadium parking and encouraging walking, cycling and use of public transport, with residential parking also limited.

374. There will be a requirement for travel plans for match and non-match days. However it will be noted that there is no objection from the Council’s Highway engineer, and mitigation measures can be provided via conditions and as part of the Section 106 agreement to ensure that there is no adverse transport affects. . IMPACTS ON NEIGHBOURS

375. The NPPF requires sustainable development, and as part of this development should aim to minimise adverse effects on the local environment, which includes neighbouring properties. LLP25 requires development to “Enhance the distinctiveness and character of the area by responding positively to the townscape, street scene, site and building context, form, scale, height, pattern and materials, distinctiveness, and natural features including bio diversity”.

376. Accordingly the proposed development policy should not cause unacceptable harm to the amenity of the surrounding land and buildings, particularly residential buildings in relation to privacy, overshadowing, wind and microclimate.

377. The policy continues, that developers should “Deliver new housing in accordance with external amenity space standards set out in appendix 6, and minimises noise, overlooking and overshadowing/loss of light, address tall buildings and the protection of important views and ensure access to storage and privacy”.

(i) Outlook and privacy

378. Given the layout of the development, and the characteristics of the site’s location in relation to the siting and proximity of surrounding development which lies to the east of the site, beyond railway lines, the proposed buildings are on the whole not considered to be overbearing. In this regard, although apparent in views from the surrounding townscape, would be viewed against the backcloth of existing development. There is sufficient separation to ensure that there would be no loss of privacy nor would the outlook be prejudiced.

(ii) Daylight and sunlight

379. On the matter of adequate daylight and sunlight, as previously indicated the application in outline. As part of the ES an assessment has been undertaken in accordance with the BRE Guidance ‘Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight: A Guide to Good Practice’ a Daylight and Sunlight and Overshadowing Technical Report was prepared, the report concluded that BRE standards would not be contravened, with the Vertical Sky components being met, in so far as the 8 blocks are concerned and there was no identified detrimental effect on adjoining properties.

380. The BRE target figure for VSC is 27% or greater to maintain good levels of daylight. If the 27% VSC target is not achieved, then a comparison of existing and proposed VSC levels with the new development in place is calculated. The BRE advises that acceptable levels of daylight can still be achieved if VSC levels are not reduced by more than 20%. If the loss is greater, then the reduction in daylight would be noticeable with rooms likely to become darker, though the closer to the target the less noticeable the impact will be.

381. The assessment concluded that BRE targets would be achieved.

Conclusion

382. The proposed development, owing to its large scale and design, as well as the long period of construction, has the potential to be disruptive to neighbours’ existing living conditions and the amenity of surrounding properties. The site’s position, which includes separation from most neighbouring sites by railway lines and roads has limited most direct impacts from the building themselves and adequate privacy and outlook for neighbours would be maintained, though clearly the look of the site will be transformed.

383. The regeneration of the site is, overall, a positive change, as the proposed housing and commercial uses are more compatible with the surrounds. There would be no material loss of daylight to windows facing the site, and there would be no adverse impact on future occupiers of the residential accommodation in the blocks and as such adequate daylight and sunlight would be maintained.

384. Other environmental impacts, including wider disruption resulting from construction, traffic and use of the stadium would be satisfactory with the recommended mitigation discussed, and the residual impacts, though substantial for a short period around matches, would be acceptable given their intermittent nature and the overall benefits of the development.

OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS

385. Consideration has been given to both wider and on-site environmental conditions and impacts, with these matters addressed in the ES as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment process.

(i) Air quality

386. The NPPF says planning decisions should ensure that any new development in Air Quality Management Areas is consistent with the local air quality action plan. It also requires the planning system to prevent both new and existing developments contributing or being put at unacceptable risk or being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of air pollution.

387. Policy LLP38 requires development to demonstrate that it will not individually or cumulatively significantly adversely effect, inter alia, air, land or neighbouring development.

388. WYG have undertaken an air quality assessment for the proposed mixed use development at Power Court, Luton. Appropriate site-specific mitigation measures have been recommended based on Section 8.2 of the IAQM Guidance on the Assessment of Dust from Demolition, Earthworks, Construction and Trackout. It is anticipated that with these appropriate mitigation measures in place, the risk of adverse effects due to emissions from the construction phase will not be significant.

389. The 2018 assessment of the effect of emissions from traffic associated with the scheme, has determined that the maximum predicted increase in the annual average exposure to NO2 at any existing receptor is likely to be 0.93 µg/m3 at Crawley Green Road (R6). All modelled existing receptors, except R4, are predicted to be below the respective AQOs for NO2 in the ‘do minimum’ and ‘do something’ scenarios. R4 is within Luton AQMA No.3, and therefore the NO2 concentrations at this receptor are expected to exceed the AQO.

390. All proposed residential receptors are predicted to be below the long term AQO for NO2 of 40 µg/m3. Therefore, no additional operational phase mitigation will be required.

391. All proposed receptors predict NO2 concentrations of below 60 µg/m3. Therefore, it is unlikely for any exceedances of the short-term NO2 AQO to occur as outlined in LAQM TG16 technical guidance. The significance of exposure for NO2 is determined to be ‘negligible’ to ‘slight’ at modelled existing receptors, based on the methodology outlined in Section 3.

392. For PM10, the maximum predicted increase in the annual average exposure is likely to be 0.18 µg/m3 at Crawley Green Road (R6).

393. For PM2.5, the maximum predicted increase in the annual average exposure is likely to be 0.09 µg/m3 at Crawley Green Road (R6).

394. All modelled existing and proposed receptors are predicted to be below the respective AQOs forPM10 and PM2.5 in the ‘do minimum’ and ‘do something’ scenarios.

395. The significance of exposure for PM10 and PM2.5 is determined to be ‘negligible’ at all receptors, based on the methodology outlined in Section 3.

396. In conclusion, following the adoption of the recommended mitigation measures, the proposed development is not considered to be contrary to any of the national and local planning policies.

(ii) Contamination

397. Policy LLP38 is relevant in the context of the policy guidance. The site has a history of industrial use. Prior to the development of the site, a detailed geo-environmental site investigation will have to be undertaken to assess potential geotechnical and environmental hazards including water environment and gas risk assessments.

398. The Applicant’s report states that the investigation will be designed to supplement previous investigations, target the sources of contamination described above and will be tailored to the site layout under the Proposed Development. Given the complexity of the site and development plan, it is likely that Detailed Quantitative Risk Assessment (DQRA) work will be required.

399. Following the site investigation, a remediation options assessment will be undertaken. A remediation strategy will be confirmed which will be designed to render the site suitable for the proposed end use such that any potential risks posed to sensitive receptors from contamination or instability issues will have been reduced to acceptable levels (i.e. Low or Lower).

400. The applicant has also advised that a version of the remediation strategy has been prepared and will be amended upon the conclusions of the pre remediation site investigation. In addition it has also been advised that Risk Assessments and Method Statements (RAMS) will be required for all aspects of groundworks and construction works, taking into account the contamination issues identified at the site. RAMS will be required to present approaches to the work that will not create negative environmental impacts, for example by mobilising contaminants or creating pathways to sensitive receptors.

Groundwater

401. The Applicant has indicated that previous reports suggest that petroleum hydrocarbons associated with the pollution incident at Guildford Street fuel station may be present as Light non-aqueous phase liquid LNAPLS) on groundwater beneath the site. LNAPLs should be considered in the site.

402. Based on the PBA 2016 Phase 1 Desk Study and a review of site investigations undertaken previously, contamination at the site is considered to present a Moderate risk to Human Health (under the proposed redevelopment scenario) and a High risk to Groundwater.

403. Luton Borough Council’s Register of Contaminated Land includes the former fuel station, located approximately 50m west of the site where a 40,000l fuel spill occurred. It is considered likely that residual contamination from this contaminate plume may be present in strata beneath the site.

404. Baseline conditions have been identified using published information on the setting of the site and a series of intrusive investigations undertaken between 2003 and 2013. The baseline describes the types and locations of (i) Potential and actual Sources of Contamination (PSCs), based on identification of current and historic land use and previous investigations and (ii) Potential Geological Hazards (PGHs), based on identification of geological hazards (such as slope stability, compressibility, high groundwater levels, shrinkage/swelling of clay stratum). The assessment also identifies the type and sensitivity of potential receptors (including consideration of human health, buildings, groundwater, surface water and ecological systems) and identification of possible migration or transportation pathways.

405. A qualitative approach has been adopted, with a progression from factual information (stated with reasonable certainty) regarding the baseline conditions, to appraisal informed by professional judgement, guidance, standards, etc. and expression of opinions on the relative significance. Previous investigations have been undertaken to quantify potential sources of contamination.

406. The possibility exists for additional contamination, not encountered in investigations to date, to be encountered in future phases of investigation.

407. A pre-remediation site investigation and risk assessment will be undertaken to resolve these risks. A version of the remediation strategy has been prepared and will be amended upon the conclusions of the pre- remediation site investigation.

408. Following further detailed investigations and assessments, as set out in this assessment, and, if necessary, remediation measures, it is considered that the risks will be at acceptable levels.

409. Mitigation measures typical of construction good practice are to be incorporated into the RAMS and CEMP to reduce the potential effects associated with any residual contamination during construction phase to not significant. These mitigation measures will be subject to conditions.

(iii) Flooding

410. Policy LL36 deals with Flood Risk, and requires that development would minimises flood risk. A Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) was submitted in support of the planning application. The Environment Agency (EA) flood map shows the site is outside the 0.1% annual probability flood extent. For planning purposes probability of flooding.

411. The site is identified as being in Critical Drainage Area. The relevant Surface Water Management plan for Luton indicates the site is at high risk of surface water flooding due to the potential collapse of the culverted River Lea which crosses the centre part of the site.

412. However the development proposals include the realignment of the River Lea which will remove the culvert and hence decrease the risk of surface water flooding. The site is considered to at low risk from other sources of flooding. It is proposed to discharge surface water to the realigned River Lea via two outfalls.

413. Attenuation is provided as Luton Borough Council require a betterment of 50% on the existing rates for all events up to and including the 1 in 100 year event including climate change. A hydraulic modelling technical note was carried out to assess the impact of the proposed realignment of the River Lea on flood levels in the areas upstream and downstream of the site.

414. Results of the modelling indicate that the re-aligned watercourse will reduce flood levels locally. Approximately 3237m3 of attenuation storage is required to reduce the existing 1 in 100 year rate by 50%. Attenuation in the form of permeable paving and geocellular storage is proposed. Although green roofs are not included in the storage calculations, it is proposed that they are used on the roofs of the residential blocks to provide a treatment stage and additional attenuation.

415. This Flood Risk Assessment concludes that the development proposals are considered appropriate subject to the above measures being implemented on site, and are in keeping with recent development in the area.

416. The Councils Lead Drainage Officer raised a number of points on flooding and drainage, and these were the subject of Technical Notes which addressed the matters raised, subject to conditions there are no drainage objections.

(iv) Noise and Vibration

417. The NPPF lists noise pollution as a consideration, whilst Policy LLP38. The ES Chapter addresses this matter. This chapter summarised the outcomes of the noise assessment undertaken for the proposed development of Power Court. It is accompanied by a technical report which fully details all of the assessments.

418. Construction noise can be controlled through the use of best practice measures detailed in the Technical report the accompanying technical report for this chapter. Operationally, the assessments indicated that with the proposed acoustic mitigation in place the development will not have a significant effect with respect to noise in the surrounding area.

419. A cumulative assessment of the development site Napier Park was also undertaken with respect to traffic noise, and operational noise from the site. It was found that the development will not have a significant effect as a result of their operational use.

420. A tranquility assessment indicated that there would not be a detrimental effect on the tranquillity of the area as a result of the development. Accordingly, the proposed development satisfies the relevant policy considerations set out in the NPPF and the PPG: Noise and Luton Borough Council Local Plan.

421. Construction – Noise and vibration from construction activity may occur from a number of sources such as use of equipment, delivery of materials, earthworks and piling. Given the scale of the development, some impact from these activities is inevitable. The significance of the impact of noise and vibration disturbance will also depend amongst other factors on the sensitivity of the receptor and their distance from the source.

422. The proposed construction work would affect the occupiers of nearby residential areas, commercial buildings, pedestrians, and during the later phases, the occupants of new housing on the site.

423. The ES shows that the noise from the construction activity would result in minor to moderate negative effects on neighbours, but these would be temporary, and would not be unreasonable with mitigation also proposed such as screening, use and maintenance of vehicles and plant in accordance with best practice. Impacts from vibration, such as from piling work, would be of negligible significance. Conditions to ensure mitigation is provided are recommended.

424. Operational - Noise from traffic associated with the non-match day uses, including the hotel, would be negligible against the existing background noise level and would not significantly affect either future occupants or neighbouring residents. The use of appropriate glazing and ventilation systems to the new housing would ensure that the interior of all flats meet the necessary standards for daytime and night-time. As both the hotel and housing are in outline form, fuller details of adequate acoustic protection would be able to be incorporated in detailed designs to be submitted with reserved matters. A condition would also be recommended to require noise from any new plant associated with the stadium, hotel and residential buildings, including mechanical ventilation, to achieve BS412 levels to ensure future occupants and neighbouring residents are protected.

425. In respect of noise from adjoining and nearby commercial uses, this is not significant as it consists of The Mall, offices and warehousing, the latter not having openings fronting the closest housing site, and this would not affect the noise environment of the new housing beyond the general background noise level.

426. For residents of the new housing match day impacts from traffic are not considered likely to be any worse than peak hour traffic conditions, however to meet relevant standards residents would need to close windows during matches as this is likely to be disruptive noting the capacity for large crowds and the proximity of the housing blocks to the stadium, though whether they choose to do this in practice would be a personal choice. Management of spectators around the stadium concourse and along major routes of arrival and departure will be necessary with this to be covered in the various documents making up the Stadium Management Plan.

427. Stadium noise would be able to be heard at surrounding residential properties, with this being from the crowd and PA system. This matter has been considered in more detail above, with impacts found to be acceptable for neighbours and other uses such as open spaces and Kew Gardens. Impacts from the use of the stadium for concerts would need to be considered on their merits.

(v) Ecology

428. An Ecological Appraisal was undertaken and it was determined that the site is of limited ecological importance, being dominated by highly modified habitats on previously developed land. These habitats supported a wide range of early successional botanical species.

429. It is suggested that a CEMP be prepared as a condition of the grant of planning permission, and that the site is subject to mitigation, management and enhancement measures included as part of the proposals and which will be the subject of conditions, together with the submission of full details of landscaping would be submitted with reserved matters.

CONCLUSION

430. This is a brownfield site within an established and busy urban area. Owing to the characteristics of the site, which is near to major roads and railway lines, it experiences high levels of noise and air pollution, both of which would mean that mitigation will be required to provide a suitable standard of accommodation for future occupants. Other than those matters there are no significant environmental constraints that would preclude re- development of the site.

431. Impacts from the development itself on both neighbouring development and future occupiers are with mitigation, considered satisfactory.

COMMUNITY BENEFITS

432. The application stresses the overall community benefits that would flow from the development, in particular from the new stadium which would provide major socio-economic benefits, enhancing the club’s existing activities and securing its long term presence in the Borough.

433. The benefits associated with the football club fall into a number of categories. On its own, LTFC is an important commercial enterprise, which has a significant number of employees and is directly responsible for substantial economic activity through procurement of good and services, as well as through spending by supporters within local shops, restaurants, public houses and transport.

434. As discussed in earlier sections, this activity is likely to substantially increase with provision of a new stadium with modern facilities, with an expected uplift in attendances. Sustained attendance increases would also be dependent on on-field success, for which there can be no guarantees.

435. Other benefits arising from the football club relate to the cultural and community values that result from its presence and the operations of its professional team and most significantly, from the work undertaken in the community by the LTFC.

436. The club has advised that it has:

 Directly and indirectly raised £2.6m for charities, as independently verified.

 LTFC has given away for charitable auction or community initiatives, over 600 signed replica shirts, over 1,000 signed footballs, over 2,000 signed programmes, over 2,000 hospitality packages, over 50,000 free tickets to children in the community.

 Its Community Trust manages over 3,600 individual engagements each week, it delivers over 70 hours of curriculum PE to schools every week, it manages over a dozen girl's and women's weekly centres reaching over 150 players and its after school programmes reach over400 children each week

437. To conclude, the cultural value of LTFC to the Borough is considered important to many people, whilst support for its continued existence in its traditional area, including possible relocation to Power Court brings obligations on the club, with disruptive impacts on local communities from matches to be minimised, and most significantly, the club should give back to the community through using its stadium as a catalyst for social, health and educational work that maximises positive outcomes for people in the region.

Conclusion

438. The new stadium will increase the community impact and benefits of the LTFC through provision of new, larger and improved facilities, as well as the creation of greater synergies with the club through co-location, which will increase its prolife and accommodate its expansion. 9.534 The proposal aims to provide bespoke improved facilities and this will allow the club to provide greater facilities to greater number of people and this has the potential to create a sporting legacy. Such a legacy is dependent on the stadium.

SUSTAINABLE DESIGN

439. Policy LLP37 provides the policy framework for sustainable development. To address this issue the applicant has considered the Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS), in this context an overall surface water drainage strategy for the Site has been prepared as part of the Flood Risk Assessment. The key principles of the strategy are as follows:

• A betterment of 50% on the existing surface water runoff rates for events up to and including the 1 in 100 year return period event with an allowance for climate change will be provided

• Surface water attenuation will be provided to accommodate the 1 in 100 year rainfall event, plus an allowance for 40% climate change increase in flows. • All surface water attenuation features are to be located in Flood Zone 1.

• An appropriate level of water quality treatment measures will be included in accordance with the SuDS treatment train outlined in CIRIA C735 and to help minimise water pollution to meet targets in Luton’s Surface Water Management Plan.

440. The Site will make use of SuDS to reduce the rate and volume of surface water leaving site and improving its quality. These features will also provide green infrastructure benefits of natural cooling, enhanced biodiversity and social amenity, as well as increasing the amount of permeable surfaces compared to the current condition of the Site.

441. Deculverting the River Lea will form a major component of this project, as it will decrease the risk of blockages and excessive silt deposits and consequently reduce flood risk. However, as the watercourse will be diverted to run parallel to the southern site boundary, current surface water runoff patterns will also be altered. Mitigation of the flow regime to limit reductions in water quality will therefore be required. Any connections from off-site will be rerouted and reconnected to the watercourse.

442. Other possible SuDS features being considered include biodiverse roofs, permeable paving, ponds and street trees.

Potable water demand reduction

443. Due to climate change, both excessive surface water due to erratic rainfall events and water scarcity caused by more frequent droughts are concerns. To accommodate these conflicting scenarios, efforts to reduce potable water demand will be taken. The aim is to reduce potable water demand to below 105 litres per person per day for residential buildings, and a 25%- 40% reduction against the BREEAM Wat 01 baseline for non- residential buildings depending on the building type.

444. The Proposed Development will prioritise the reduction of potable water demand using water efficient sanitary ware and low water demand landscapes. Following that, system optimisation through use of leak detection, flow controls, water meters and connection to Building Management Systems will lead to efficient use and distribution of water. Finally, options for alternative water sources will be explored.

445. Measures that may be implemented include installing low flow fixtures and fittings and exploring the financial viability of rainwater harvesting and greywater recycling for non potable water uses. The Design Team are exploring opportunities for alternative water sources to eliminate the need to irrigate the landscaped areas with potable water, particularly the football pitch and the green roofs. The feasibility of rainwater harvesting from the roof of the stadium or greywater recycling from laundry facilities within the hotel may be investigated.

446. The use of artificial turf on the football pitch is also being considered as it will not require irrigation.

Energy conservation and carbon reduction

447. The Proposed Development seeks to reduce energy use and carbon emissions in line with the equivalent of Code for Sustainable Homes Level 4, which equates to a 19% improvement against Part L1A for all residential buildings, as well as achieve 4 credits under the BREEAM Ene 01 issue for the stadium and music venue and 3 credits for the retail units and supermarket. As the process for calculating the reduction of emissions against the Part L regulations is complex and not enough information is known to conduct a full assessment at this time, a generalised approach for reducing energy use and carbon emissions follows.

Sustainability measures

448. The proposed development will follow the energy hierarchy to reduce energy consumption. That means first taking a lean approach by designing buildings that use less energy in the first place through passive design, including improved building fabric, optimisation of solar gains to balance winter heat gains against summer cooling demands and orientation. Highly energy efficient lighting and appliances will be use throughout. Exploration of connection to a potential district heating network, as well as assessment of potential use of low or zero carbon technologies, such as solar PV panels, will be completed as part of the next stage of design.

449. As some of the buildings at the Site will be open (such as the stadium building), reducing energy use and carbon emissions in the non-residential buildings will be challenging. Therefore, energy savings will be made where appropriate using the energy hierarchy. The Proposed Development’s approach seeks to follow the energy hierarchy for both non-residential and residential buildings as prescribed in Luton Local Plan Policy LP 37.

Reduce energy

450. Passive design measures, such as low U-values, use of insulation, high- performance glazing, external shading, good practice airtightness and use of exposed thermal mass will all be considered as part of Site-wide strategies to reduce energy demand first through building design. Building orientation, unit layouts and integrated landscape design will contribute. These efforts will reduce the need for heating in the winter while minimising overheating from solar gains in the summer.

451. Energy efficiency measures, such as LED lighting, white goods with high energy ratings, efficient building services (including efficient air handling units, fan coil units, chillers and gas boilers), efficient external and security lighting, where appropriate will be integrated to help to reduce the energy consumption required for lighting and power. Energy efficient lifts and escalators will be used where applicable. An innovative new system will be used to light the stadium, consisting of LED halo suspension lighting instead of standard external floodlights, in order to both reduce energy consumption and limit light pollution.

452. Strategies to reduce hot water demand, like those outlined in the Water Sensitive Design section, will also contribute to reducing energy demand. Particularly with the expected hot water demands from the hotel and residential buildings, multiple benefits can be achieved by reducing potable hot water demand through the use of low flow fixtures and fittings.

453. To ensure long-term reductions in energy use, energy metering systems will be installed to allow tenants to monitor and reduce their own energy consumption. Encouraging these behavioural shifts will also form a significant part of long-term climate mitigation efforts. A Building Management System will also be installed to allow the facilities manager to control and monitor the building’s mechanical and electrical equipment, including ventilation, lighting, power systems, fire systems, and security systems.

Low and zero carbon energy generation

454. The opportunity to generate low and zero carbon energy on site will be explored in detail at the next stage. Potential options for renewable energy generation to be explored include: PVs, solar water heating, ground source heat pumps, biomass heating and wind turbines.

Decentralised energy networks and generation

455. At present, there are no known decentralised energy networks in proximity to the Proposed Development, nor are there any masterplans that indicate the proposed locations of any. Regardless, a full assessment will need to be completed at the next stage of design to identify the scope for decentralised energy networks and generation for Power Court.

Off-site solutions

456. After a full assessment of the extent to which measures can be provided on site to reduce energy use and generate renewable energy, opportunities to achieve additional provision of solutions off-site will be explored. This could include provision of decentralised, low and zero carbon energy generation off-site or payment into funds, where available, to offset other offsite carbon reduction programmes.

Materials and waste management

457. After reducing energy use and carbon emissions from the operation of the Proposed Development, the next priority for reducing carbon from the development is to consider the embodied energy and carbon present in the structures themselves. The thoughtful consideration of materials used for the construction of the Proposed Development and the handling of waste both during the construction of the Proposed Development and during its occupation and operation will lead to a strategic approach to reducing the carbon footprint of the building, reducing waste and ultimately reducing cost.

Sustainability measures

458. While a full Waste Audit will be conducted in the next stage of design in the form of a Resource Management Plan, the following outlines the approach to incorporating circular economy principles into the design. This strategy seeks to reduce the embodied carbon of the building structure and associated infrastructure with a multi-pronged approach of lean design, modern methods of construction, sustainable procurement of materials, use of recycled materials and appropriate reduction of waste generated and landfilled during construction. Further, it incorporates into designs mechanisms to enable building tenants to continue that strategy by sustainably managing their waste.

Reducing embodied carbon in design

459. The use of lean design principles will identify opportunities to design structures that optimise the amount of materials used so as not to expend unnecessary embodied energy, cost oversizing or over engineering elements.

460. Closely associated with the above, the principle of designing out waste will identify opportunities to select materials and sizes of elements in such a way that reduces the amount of waste produce from offcuts and packaging.

461. The principle of designing for durability and efficiency takes that further by identifying opportunities to select materials that will last for the duration of the building life cycle without the need for frequent replacement or maintenance.

462. The use of modern methods of construction and modular building techniques will also be explored to take advantage of prefabrication and off-site construction to optimize construction and reduce waste and cost.

463. All of this will need to be balanced against the need for flexible design for future expansion or change in use, particularly for aspects of the development that are built speculatively. This means waiting to specify finishes until tenants are identified or using elements that can flexibly accommodate multiple types of uses.

Sustainable procurement

464. Materials that are selected for buildings will be selected to prioritise responsibly, ethically and locally sourced materials. Working closely with supply chains and industries to co-develop solutions that achieve sustainability targets will be encouraged. Sustainability targets will be incorporated into procurement packages and tender documentation.

465. Materials with high recycled content will also be prioritised.

Construction site management of materials and waste

466. While a considerable amount can be done to reduce embodied carbon through design and procurement, waste management during construction will be key. The Waste Audit and Resource Management Plan will be developed and implemented by the contractor.

467. To the extent possible, the reuse of waste on site will be explored, such as reuse of hoarding for formwork or reuse of crushed concrete as subbase. When not possible, reuse of waste off site will be pursued, including return of offcuts to manufacturers for reuse, provision of materials to local groups and transfer of fill, when appropriate, for use on other sites.

468. These opportunities, as well as the segregation of waste on site and the use of waste or logistics managers could provide additional opportunities to reduce waste to landfill.

Operational waste management

469. The Proposed Development will be designed to incorporate appropriately sized and accessible waste and recycling facilities. Where possible, food waste recycling or composting facilities will be made available to further reduce waste to landfill. For residential buildings, appropriately sized storage areas both within units and for the whole building will be designed to meet and coordinated with local guidelines.

Sustainable transport options

Baseline conditions

Access to transit

470. A Framework Stadium Travel Demand Management Strategy, assesses the quality of the existing public transport network. Overall, access to transit is very good thanks to the Site’s location adjacent to Luton’s main transport hub.

471. The closest bus stops to the site are located of either side of St. Mary’s Road adjacent to the site, and three further bus stops are located approximately 50m from the site boundary. These are therefore within the “desirable” 400m distance recommended for journeys on foot. Luton also has a guided bus system – the Luton Dunstable Busway – that directly connects Luton with wider destinations not provided by other local bus routes, including London Luton Airport. While it does not currently stop at Power Court, there is an opportunity for a new stop to be created with the new development as it currently runs due north of the Site.

472. The Site benefits from its proximity to Luton Interchange rail station, which is approximately a 6-minute walk from the Site. It is also relatively close to Luton Airport Parkway Station (20- minute walk from the Site). The Midland Mainline service provides access to London St Pancras International, Bedford, Nottingham and Sheffield. In terms of train frequency, a total of 11 rail services per evening peak hour depart at Luton Airport Parkway station, providing access to London and the South. Thirteen northbound services are available in the evening peak hour, which provides access to Bedford, Nottingham, Leeds and Sheffield. Furthermore, rail connectivity is to be enhanced further through station redevelopment plans at Luton Interchange; the proposals include increased station capacity, new retail options and improved disabled access scheme. The proposals will fall into Control Period 6, which begins in 2019.

Pedestrian and cycle access

473. Power Court’s location adjacent to the Luton town centre primary shopping area allows it to benefit from a comprehensive and established pedestrian network. Footways which run along the boundary of the Site are deemed to be of acceptable width and condition, with street lighting, dropped kerbs and tactile surfacing provided at street junctions to enable safe and expeditious connections.

474. However, there are areas for improvement. Pedestrian connections from the Site to the town centre are limited: there are significant levels of severance and pedestrian delay along the four-lane single carriageway running along the Church Street-St Mary’s Road corridor due to the intensity of traffic and guard railing in the central reservation. Additionally, no controlled access facilities are provided at the Power Court Road- Church Street junction that provides a direct route into the town centre from the Power Court access road.

475. Luton’s local cycle network is comprehensive and conducive to cycling, with over a quarter of the cycle network provided as off-road. Direct connectivity from Power Court to Luton town centre’s cycle network is provided through the bus lane on Church Street, opposite the Power Court road site access. Segregated cyclist facilities are also provided along Park Street, as well as an Advanced Stop Line at the Park Street-Cumberland Street signalised crossroads, thereby improving cycle safety. The new development at the Site should add to Luton’s cycling infrastructure, especially by providing new cycle parking, as the nearest parking to Power Court is currently 300m south of the Site.

Sustainability measures

476. Given Power Court’s town centre location, the Framework Stadium Travel Demand Management Strategy is targeting a 10.7% reduction in private vehicle trips.

477. A range of “hard” infrastructure and “soft” marketing and promotional measures will be implemented by the Club to incentivise visitors to use sustainable transport modes.

Parking provision, electric vehicles charging and car club

478. The new development at Power Court is likely to generate some increase in car trips in the surrounding area, although measures will be implemented to promote more sustainable transport modes (see below). To cater for this demand, there will be 400 on-plot car parking spaces that will only be provided on match days. This is substantially below Luton Borough Council standards for D2 Stadium use, and furthermore they will be restricted to hospitality guests, sponsors, media and playing staff; these spaces will not be available for “general” supporters. An additional 800 parking spaces are proposed to cater for other uses, including food retail, residential, offices, and leisure facilities.

479. To reduce the number of cars accessing the Site, a car sharing club will be implemented for residents to encourage tenants to reduce single occupancy car trips. The Site will also have charging points for electric cars and bicycles.

Cycle infrastructure

480. Opportunities for new cycling facilities will be fully considered during the early design stages. This includes the appropriate number of covered and secure bicycle parking spaces to fulfil the requirements to achieve 2 credits under the BREEAM Tra 03 Cyclist facilities issue and in accordance with the Council’s minimum cycle parking standards. Auxiliary facilities for staff who commute by cycle will be provided where possible, such as showers, lockers or drying spaces. Additional cycle parking provision for residents and visitors will also be incorporated.

Pedestrian and cycle infrastructure

481. A range of “hard” infrastructure measures will be implemented to maximise visitor trips on foot and ensure that sufficient capacity is provided in pedestrian networks to accommodate this demand. A masterplan has been produced for the St Marys Road Corridor, which proposes to transform the streetscape and provide a high quality public “place” that interacts directly with the adjacent primary shopping area. Most significantly for the Site, the carriageway width along St Mary’s Road/Church Street is proposed to be reduced from four to two lanes. This will allow the River Lea to be deculverted and reduce the “barrier” effect of the current arrangement, thereby facilitating increased pedestrian movement.

482. The Applicant proposes “Soft” measures to encourage both walking and cycling include information sharing on the, health benefits of active transport modes on the Club’s website, pedometers and discounted cycle shop vouchers for supporters, and supporter competitions organised by the Club during Bike Week and Liftshare Week.

Public transport

483. In addition to promoting walking and cycling to replace short- and medium- distance car trips, improving public transport provision will provide an alternative for longer distance trips.

484. A new shuttle bus service will be provided on match days in order to reduce the number of car journeys made into Luton town centre, generating air quality and social amenity benefits. It is currently proposed that these services will run from satellite locations on Hitchin Road, the A6, and Newlands Park to and from Power Court.

485. Rail facilities will also be improved to ensure that they can cater for increased travel demand. Thameslink have currently funded platform improvements, staircase widening and concourse improvements at Luton Interchange.

486. A range of “soft” measures will also be implemented by the Club to encourage visitors to travel to Power Court by public transport modes. This includes providing match day stewards at key “pinch point” junctions to facilitate the safe and expeditious movement of supporters, and making travel information more readily available on the Club website.

Responsible construction

Air quality

487. Power Court is not currently located in an Air Quality Management Area and measures should be implemented to ensure this condition does not change.

Land contamination

488. Power Court is a brownfield site; it was formerly an industrial area. As such, it is likely that the land will be contaminated. The detail of this matter has been addressed previously.

489. The construction phase also has the potential to cause groundwater and surface water pollution through the mobilisation of contaminants and creation of new pathways during excavation and earthworks. Drainage from impermeable surfaces may include contaminants from vehicles, including oil, rubber and paint. Though the flood risk and drainage assessment this identified risk can be localised and temporary, appropriate mitigation measures should be implemented to reduce potential harm to local watercourses and wildlife.

Sustainability measures

490. Due to the large and phased nature of the proposed development, the construction period is expected to last for some time. Construction provides a key opportunity for implementing sustainability measures as the bridge between design and operation. Opportunities for consideration during construction to be incorporated as part of the contractor’s responsibility can be implemented.

Environmental management, monitoring and reporting

491. The Applicant has indicate that an onsite environmental manager will be assigned to monitor and mitigate noise/vibration, air/dust, and surface water and litter pollution during all stages of construction. The said party will also be responsible for monitoring energy, potable water and fuel use, and reducing where possible.

492. A BREEAM Assessor will be appointed to monitor and certify that the proposed development achieves the targeted BREEAM ratings.

Materials and construction waste

493. All materials used on site will be responsibly sourced and sustainably procured and waste on site will be managed under a Resource Management Plan to reduce waste to landfill.

494. In accordance with BREEAM Mat 03 Responsible sourcing, all timber used in the design and construction process must be 100% FSC certified. Contractors should also be requested to obtain Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) for the products used onsite.

Drainage management and water quality

495. A Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) will specify the water management measures to be implemented during construction. It will include the following:

• A suitable drainage scheme to control surface water runoff generated during construction so as not to increase flood risk downstream. The scheme will also include measures for managing silt that may be generated during construction, including wheelwashing.

• Mitigation measures against contaminated water run-off arising from general construction activities and operation of construction vehicles. This may include temporary bunding and settlement ponds to allow for on-site treatment of any contaminated water prior to discharge.

• Full briefing given to onsite operatives on best practice in minimising water use.

Construction air quality

496. Best practices regarding the control of dust on site will be incorporated, such as wheel wash facilities at the entrances/exits to the Site to ensure all construction vehicles leaving the site are clean and thus minimising the level of dust and dirt transferred onto public highways.

497. Regulations on the reduction of emissions for non-road mobile machinery will be followed.

Land remediation

498. If contaminated land is encountered on site, it will be managed carefully and remediated, removed or segregated as appropriate. Appropriate procedures, method statements and testing regimes will be developed to manage risk and eliminate potential pollution pathways during construction and for occupation. Construction practices will follow best practice guidance in order to limit any adverse impacts arising from construction activities. This may include protection from dust inhalation for the workforce on the removal of hardstanding areas and control of direct exposure to soils during earthworks excavations.

Ecology

499. A Construction Environment Management Plan will be implemented to ensure that construction phase-impacts on existing habitats are mitigated during site clearance and construction. This includes repeat external inspection prior to the demolition of particular buildings on the Site, to confirm that they do not house roosting bats. Common urban bird species are most likely to be affected by the construction phase; therefore, works should be timed to avoid the bird nesting period (usually March to August inclusive), and any demolition during the nesting season should be approved by an ecologist.

Construction traffic

500. A Construction Traffic Management Plan will set the framework for construction traffic management in accordance with planning conditions and any other requirements. This will be the responsibility of the contractor to complete and will be agreed with the Council prior to the start of construction. As well as seeking to reduce the impact of heavy goods vehicles (HGVs), it will also seek to reduce the impact on workforce trips on the local highway network through a vehicle sharing strategy.

501. Construction traffic delivering materials to site will be routed from the M1 from the North and South. This route links with New Airport Way with onward routing to the Site envisaged via Gipsy Lane and A505 Windmill Road. Therefore, construction traffic movements are envisaged to be via residential corridors, thereby minimising inconvenience to nearby sensitive villages. To minimise the impact on the local road network as a whole, the arrival of vehicles to the site will be restricted to outside highway peak periods (08:00-09:00 and 17:00-18:00). A booking system will also facilitate the spread of HGV deliveries evenly across the day.

Considerate Constructors Scheme

502. The contractor will be required to register the Site under the Considerate Constructors Scheme (CCS). This external assessment of site practices fosters improvements and innovations throughout construction. The Site will aspire to gain an innovation credit under BREEAM Man 03 Responsible Construction Practices by achieving a CCS score of at least 40.

Social sustainability

503. The measures detailed above to improve the natural amenity value of the Site and the surrounding area will have significant socio-economic benefits; easy access to greenspace and mitigating adverse microclimatic conditions will raise the wellbeing of the local community. In addition, more direct measures to raise the socio-economic standing of both the existing and new community will also be implemented.

504. This includes targets for employment and skills while recruiting construction workforce, ensuring health and wellbeing are considered during design, construction and operation and engaging the local community during development and once completed.

Health and wellbeing

505. Comfortable working conditions for staff working within the stadium and music venue will be considered. Issues such as glare control, appropriate daylighting and adequate views out will be incorporated into design.

506. For the music venue, acoustic performance testing will be carried out to ensure the appropriate sound insulation is used for low indoor ambient noise levels. Noise impact assessments for non-domestic buildings will be done to address noise impacting for neighbouring properties.

507. Security consultants will be used to incorporate safe access and egress of the Proposed Development and ensure that buildings and landscapes are designed with security in mind.

Conclusions

508. The proposed development seeks to achieve sustainability that incorporates, and exceeds BREEAM Good ratings for all non-residential buildings. The various approached to achieve these detail will be delivered by Management Plans. Detailed approaches to achieving targets under each of the broad themes will be explored in upcoming stages of design and planning.

509. The proposal includes adequate measures to ensure the development is able to achieve current standards for energy efficiency and sustainable building design. Conditions will secure details of the various measures proposed and required.

ACCESSIBILITY

510. Sustainable development includes meeting needs of the community. In so far as accessibility is concerned it is important that such development promotes inclusive access (Policies LLP1 and LLP25).

511. Housing, retail and hotel – As the housing, retail and hotel are outline, full details of their design will be submitted with reserved matters and the above requirements would be the subject of conditions to ensure compliance. Ongoing arrangements for accessibility to the hotel and its facilities should be addressed in a management plan, with a further condition recommended in this regard.

512. Stadium – The new stadium has been designed to be fully accessible, and the DAS sets out the relevant British Standards, Planning Guidance Supplementary Planning Document 2013 and other guidance from Sport England, Sports Grounds Safety Authority, Guide to Safety at Sports Grounds and Guide Dogs for the Blind, which have been referenced. This would be a major improvement on the existing home ground, which has inadequate facilities for disabled people.

Conclusion

513. The proposed development provides opportunities for improvements in inclusiveness or different groups in the community and in particular people with disabilities. Further details of the outline elements and the proposed measures for the stadium will be secured by conditions. . PLANNING OBLIGATIONS

514. A planning obligation may be required to control the impact of a development particularly in circumstances where the desired restrictions go beyond the scope of planning conditions. In accordance with section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, the local authority will enter into a legal agreement with the applicant (including anyone else who has a legal interest in the land) to secure planning obligations.

515. Paragraph 56 of the NPPF says local planning authorities should consider whether otherwise unacceptable development could be made acceptable through the use of conditions or planning obligations. Planning obligations should only be used where it is not possible to address unacceptable impacts through a planning condition. Whilst paragraph 56 says obligations should only be sought where they meet all of the following tests:

• necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms • directly related to the development; and • Fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.

516. Planning obligations can include financial obligations requiring monetary contributions to the local authority to fund works or services as well as in- kind obligations requiring specific actions to be performed by specific parties.

517. The Council Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) sets out in principle what kind of planning applications will require planning obligations and in broad terms how monies will be spent on projects related to the proposed development.

518. The SPD says the Council recognises that in specific instances planning obligations may be a significant factor that affects development viability. In this regard it is recognised that there may be circumstances where a developer may consider that it is not feasible for the proposed development to meet all the requirements set out in local, regional and national planning policies and still be economically viable (for example, where development specific costs are exceptionally high). The onus will be on the developer to provide information regarding the viability of the scheme.

519. The following sections discuss the need for planning obligations arising from the development and its impacts. The application is in outline form, and the development parameters are set out in the description of the application.

Affordable Housing

520. The provision of affordable housing contributes towards sustainable local communities. People on different income levels all need a choice of where they can live, close to family and community networks and accessible to workplaces.

521. Until the number and mix of dwelling type is finalised it is not possible to accurately assess either the extent of affordable housing to be provided or the extent of any commuted sum to be paid. However the basis of the provision would be 10% affordable intermediate to buy, and 10% Affordable Rent. The commuted sum would be based on £21,000 per unit. This figure is based on a historic requirement.

Transport

522. New developments generate additional trips to and from the site, which can add pressure to roads, pedestrian and cycle routes, and public transport facilities, and which will lead to additional problems if measures are not taken to address the impact of new developments. The Council will therefore seek to ensure that the transport impacts of new developments are mitigated or compensated.

523. The Highway Engineer has advised that a figure of £2.1 million will be required to undertake the works set out above to provide offsite works. The following works have been indicated:

• £700,000 St Marys Roundabout improvements contribution • £300,000 Kimpton/Windmill junction improvement contribution • £400,000 Hucklesby/Hitchin Rod junction improvement contribution • £100,000 Sustainable Transport contribution • £300,000 Crawley Green Road/ Crescent Road junction contribution • £300,000 Highways Improvements including street lighting in the vicinity of Power Court

Amenity/ Open Space

524. No consultation response has been received

Education

525. The additional housing would accommodate a significant number of people, including children. There is an ongoing shortage of school places. As set out above this outline planning application does not finalise numbers or mix of dwellings. However on the basis of current calculations the following contributions would be required:

2 bed dwelling – £5778.00 per dwelling 3 bed dwelling – £11295.00 per dwelling 4 bed dwelling – £19297.00 per dwelling

526. The development is in an area of Luton that is experiencing an increasing shortage of School places. As the birth rate continues to rise this is expected to become worse. The calculation estimated an even split to give an idea of the pupil numbers involved. The local schools are oversubscribed and have waiting lists in most year groups. This development will yield approximately 284.96 primary children and 63.02 secondary aged children which will add to the increasing burden of sourcing school places.

527. The primary contribution will go towards remodelling of the York street site external areas to provide playground space. The secondary contribution will be put towards the new Chiltern academy school at the Brache for offsite service provision of the new school. The council is expected to use S106 money from development such as these to pay for the additional school places that will be required. The DfE expects LA's to lever S106 funds to support the additional infrastructure necessary for the development.

Museums

528. With regards to this planning application the site is directly in the centre of the town and equal distant from the towns 2 museums of Wardown Park Museum and Stockwood Discovery Centre. Their combined visitors are over 250,000 per year and as such represents a significant draw for the Borough and for business and residents and make an economic contribution to the town.

529. In terms of the current S106 arrangements the Museums would see a significant impact in the town’s growth and economic expansion. This site would bring significant numbers to the town and to ensure a high quality experience when here it is vital that's users of the new site not only have a great experience on site, but also can tap into a wider heritage and museums opportunity to enhance their visit and help ensure these new visitors stays in the town and contribute to a wider economic growth.

530. Estimates of increase use are not listed in the application so we cannot set a sum against this but we would estimate in the region of £50,000 of investment would be needed on site to accommodate the increase in the likely resulting use

531. Whilst it is understood that the development would give rise to an increase in use of the two facilities described, it is not considered that these contributions would be CIL compliant. The Regulations (Regulation 123) limits the number of Section 106 obligations to a maximum, and advises that where there has been 5 or more obligations for a project or type of infrastructure that have been entered into since 6 April 2010, and it is a type of infrastructure that is capable of being funded by CIL then no more contributions may be collected in respect of a specific infrastructure project or a type of infrastructure through a section 106 agreement.

532. There is concern that the projects identified have been the subject of more than 5 such obligations, and as such no more contributions may be collected. Accordingly this contribution would not be CIL compliant

Libraries

533. £30,000 contribution sought towards Bury Park Library project which includes increased space and relocation of the library at the front to accommodate increased demand. However as with the Museums There is concern that the projects identified have been the subject of more than 5 such obligations, and as such no more contributions may be collected. Accordingly this contribution would not be CIL compliant.

Waste

534. The level of S106 contribution appropriate for the residential element of this development 16/01400/OUTEIA, Power Court, Luton, Bedfordshire,, having regard to the adopted Supplementary Planning Document on Planning Obligation is £19,500.

Network Rail

535. Requirement for a contribution to be provided towards signage and pedestrian walkways

THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS

536. As set out above the application has been the subject of representations which raise the following issues,

 Designs unacceptable,  noise pollution,  light pollution,  traffic congestion/parking,  impact on River Lea,  site is not integrated with the rest of the town,  impact on St Marys Church,  impact of live music,  construction works will be disruptive,  anti-social behaviour/increased litter,  impact on shopping centre,  impact on local house prices,  the linkage of the site to the site at Newlands Park (16/01401/OUTEIA)

537. These matters have been addressed previously in this report. In so far as the matter of the impact of the proposed development on house prices, this is not a planning matter, and does not fall to be addressed by Members.

CONCLUSIONS

538. The application raises numerous planning issues for consideration, and requires a difficult and complex evaluation of many impacts, both positive and negative. This assessment has taken into account relevant Development Plan policies, the NPPF, information in an Environmental Statement and other environmental information including that submitted in accordance with Regulation 22 of the EIA Regulations 2011.

539. The issues considered relate to the stadium, commercial elements and the housing and other accommodation works. The application has attracted widespread public interest with large numbers of submissions both for and against it. Many statutory consultees and local amenity groups have also commented.

540. The primary objective of the application is the provision of a new home ground for LTFC, with their existing stadium at Kenilworth Road being outdated and lacking in facilities. The Football Club do not own the ground, and are seeking to re-establish an ownership of their own ground.

541. The current ground limits opportunities to generate match day income from hospitality and sponsors, and to attract and retain new supporters, all of which would assist in putting the club on a more sustainable financial footing.

542. Whilst the proposed development is part compliant with Policies LLP1, LLP3 and LLP9, the policies do not provide support for the proposed stadium. In the context of the wider strategic objectives, Strategic Objective 9 seeks “To deliver a new Luton football stadium in a location capable of good access to transport infrastructure along with associated uses, shared venue events, and ancillary sports related uses.” There are no other preferable sites in the Borough, and the Applicant does own the site.

543. The impacts of the proposal are considerable and wide-ranging. The proposed football stadium with ancillary facilities, the commercial development and the new housing, would completely transform the site providing a major opportunity to add to the ongoing regeneration of the Borough. This would make a major positive contribution to wider strategic objectives of the Development Plan, to promote regeneration of previously developed sites for the enhancement of the quality of life, housing and employment opportunities, and to attract new economic development, encourage economic diversity, This would be consistent with objectives 1, 2, 3 and 9.

544. There are no significant land use constraints that would prohibit the proposal, with the development being generally consistent with strategic policy framework for land uses. Power Court is a Policy Area site, Policy LLP9. The Stadium element of the site would be a departure from the current policy designation, which does not include the provision of a stadium facility.

545. The overall scheme would create many new jobs, and would continue to ensure that spending in the Borough by spectators, visitors and residents, aiding local economic activity and growth, would be maintained. The construction phase would create jobs over the build period, whilst the expanded operations for BLTFC, the hotel, and other commercial uses, plus the expected expenditure of football supporters and new residents would raise permanent employment in the area by, potentially 677 jobs. This would be consistent with Policy LLP1.

546. Other major issues relating to impacts from the proposal on the environment during construction, and on both match-days and non-match days are satisfactory, subject to the recommended planning obligations and conditions.

547. One of the main issues is the impact of the uses on the transport network, including traffic on the adjacent roads, which includes strategic roads. Construction traffic is potentially disruptive given the scale and duration of the works, though it would not impact significantly on the road network, and conditions requiring appropriate routing and management will minimise impacts.

548. Match-day transport impacts have been thoroughly assessed in conjunction with the Council’s Highway Engineer and Highways England. The assessment indicates that by providing a comprehensive package of measures as outlined in the TA, a new Stadium-led development at Power Court that regenerates an important site in Luton town centre has been demonstrated comprehensively to be more accessible than the existing stadium location through the significant transport infrastructure that exists in the area.

549. Infrastructure provision is critical to support the movement of significant numbers of people and a major benefit of the proposed location. Fundamentally, Power Court is perhaps the most accessible location in Luton. The siting of a Stadium in this location where a multitude of transport choices exist allows supporters to travel sustainability with as little impact across a wide number of modes and services as possible.

550. The development proposals and proposed improvements/mitigation measures will result in the Stadium and Non-Stadium uses being accommodated and managed sufficiently so that there are no significant adverse transport effects. There are no highway objections to the proposals. The proposed development is not therefore inconsistent with policies LLP1 and LLP31.

551. Effects on neighbours to the site are on balance satisfactory, in accordance with Policies LLP1, LLP25 and LLP38 with mitigation provided through conditions to limit impacts from the uses proposed, including noise, air quality and lighting. With the mitigation recommended and to be secured by conditions, environmental conditions are satisfactory for the uses proposed, including new housing. The proposed housing would make a significant contribution to the Borough’s supply of new housing. Affordable housing is proposed, as part of the development, and this together with a commuted sum will be secured by a Section 106 agreement.

552. Use of appropriate quality materials and sensitive refinement of the building’s form and articulation, guided by a Design Code (which would be the subject of a condition) will ensure that the appearance of the development will be to a high standard.

553. With regard to the townscape impact, in this case, there are positive impacts to the surrounding area, and to the internal layout of the development. The benefits of the development would result in sustainable development which has three mutually dependent dimensions, economic, social and environmental. The main benefits of the scheme are:

Social

 Provision of a modern sports stadium with full disabled access and facilities, supporting and enhancing the social and cultural well-being of the community and adding to the community/sporting assets of the region.

 Likely improvement to the long term financial sustainability of LTFC and its existence in the Borough, protecting its long heritage (over 130 years) and adding to the identity and civic pride of the area.

 Likely significant expansion of the community benefits provided by LTFC with major positive impacts in the region on social inclusion, health, education, and sporting activity.

 Provision of up to 550 new dwellings.

Environment

 Re-use of a previously developed site for a mix of uses including housing offsetting need for greenfield development.

 Regeneration of unsightly brownfield land of low townscape value, thereby enhancing the appearance of site and acting as a catalyst for improvements to nearby rundown areas.

 Creation of new and enhanced public realm.

 New paving, street tree planting, lighting and pathways will enhance the permeability of the area linking places of interest to the surrounding area, such as St Marys Church and the main Town Centre.

Economic

 Significant contribution to economic growth through increased employment and expenditure from new housing, commercial uses and stadium operation, which is likely to enhance local shops and services, with local match day spending to rise from overall on-site employment plus creation of a further additional full time equivalent jobs in the area resulting from spending from new residents.

 Opportunities for enhancement of skills and knowledge of local people through training initiatives.

554. There is a need to secure mitigation measures and to restrict the proposals to the parameters assessed in both the environmental impact assessment and the details comprised in the planning application, this will be ensured by conditions. A section 106 agreement is also required to secure delivery of the stadium and its community benefits and other mitigation, including necessary community infrastructure.

555. The development will give rise to an extensive range of positive impacts, which are considerable and widespread in their public benefit, including those that would follow from securing the regeneration of the site and especially the provision of a large number of new dwellings, new employment, new investment and spending in the area.

556. As is clear from the above, there are two principal respects in which the development has adverse impacts. First, in breach of the local plan objectives for the town centre and the Power Court site, the stadium would displace the potential for a significant element of comparison retail development. Second, as set out in detail above, the development will cause less than substantial harm to heritage assets, a matter to which particular weight and importance must be given. It is for the Council to consider whether the public benefits of the proposal outweigh that harm. It is considered that the potential benefits resulting from the development are of a nature and scale as to outweigh the harms identified.

557. The weight to give to these all matters is ultimately a decision for Members. When considering this balance of impacts, it is highlighted that they must ensure they take account of the information submitted with the Environmental Statement and the further information submitted, and in considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed building or its setting, members should have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses.

558. Taking all these matters into account, balancing the social, environmental and economic benefits of the development against the residual harm, approval is recommended.

LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1972, SECTION 100D

Luton Local Plan 2011-2031

National Planning Policy Framework

National Planning Practice Guidance

DETERMINATION OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS

The Council is required in all cases where the Development Plan is relevant, to determine planning applications in accordance with policies in the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

EQUALITY ACT 2010

In reaching the recommendation set out in this report, proper consideration has to be given to the duty imposed on the Council under the Equality Act 2010 to have due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct that is prohibited by that Act; to advance equality of opportunity and to foster good relations between persons who share relevant protected characteristics and persons who do not share it. The protected characteristics under the Act are a person’s age, sex, gender assignment, sexual orientation, disability, marriage or civil partnership, pregnancy or maternity, race, religion or belief. In this case, no disproportionate effect on people with protected characteristics has been identified.

HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1998

The determination of the application is considered to involve the following human rights:-

1. Article 8: Right to respect for private and family life; and 2. Article 1 of the First Protocol: Protection of Property

The report considers in detail the competing rights and interests involved in the application. Having had regard to those matters in the light of the Convention rights referred to above, it is considered that the recommendation is in accordance with the law, proportionate and balances the needs of the Applicant with the protection of the rights and freedoms of others in the public interest.

SECTION 17 CRIME AND DISORDER ACT 1998

In reaching the recommendation set out, due regard has been given to the duty imposed upon the Council under Section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 to do all it reasonably can to prevent crime and disorder in its area. Regard has been had to Policy LLP25 x. and the opportunity to reduce crime and anti-social behaviour has been considered by both the proposals and the consultation responses of the Police. Security measures are proposed, to ensure that where there is conflict between uses that there is mitigation.