07/01000/MKCOD3 CONSTRUCTION OF COMMUNITY FACILITY INCLUDING PAVILLION, GROUND RE- LEVELLING AND DRAINAGE TO CREATE 4 PITCHES (RUGBY, /), THREE 15 METRE HIGH FLOODLIGHTS AND 110 PARKING BAYS AT Emerson Valley District Park, Bowland Drive, Emerson Valley FOR Milton Keynes Council

INTRODUCTION

The site comprises two adjoining areas: a district park laid out mainly as grassed open space with landscaping and footpaths around its edges, and an undeveloped reserved site adjacent to Bowland Drive. The site area totals 7.48 ha, and is surrounded on 3 sides by established housing development, and abuts the V2 Tattenhoe Street on its south western side. On the opposite side of the V2 grid road lies Howe Park Wood, a site of special scientific interest (SSSI) supporting a population of bats, moths and butterlies.

CURRENT APPLICATION

It is proposed to change the nature of the existing park from grassed open space to sports pitches which would not be enclosed by fencing in order to allow public use of the land when not in use for . It is proposed to re-level and provide drainage for the land to provide 3 full size rugby pitches and 1 smaller rugby pitch. A baseball/softball diamond would overlap with one of the full size rugby pitches. Three 15m high floodlights would be located around this duel use pitch to enable evening use up to 9pm mainly for rugby training use.

A sports pavilion of 730sqm is proposed to be sited on the southern end of the sports pitches, on land currently allocated as a reserve site. The pavilion will contain 6 changing rooms, a 140sqm function room/clubhouse, with ancillary kitchen, bar, toilets and storage space. Due to the ground levels difference, the pavilion will be level with the new pitches on the northern side but raised on supports facing the 110 car parking spaces located off Bowland Drive.

The design of the pavilion is a simple rectangular form clad in white render, with polished grey blockwork and sections of timber cladding and glazing.

The application is accompanied by a statement of community involvement, a transport assessment, drainage and landscaping proposals, and an extract from the Milton Keynes Council Playing Pitch strategy 2003 - 2008. There is also information on the operating hours, summarised as follows: Saturdays - Senior rugby matches, clubhouse used 10.00 - 23.00

Sundays - Youth and training and matches 10.00 - 12.00 Occasional Senior rugby matches - Clubhouse used 10:00 - 23:00

Tuesdays & Thursdays Senior rugby training 19.00 - 21.00 Clubhouse - 18.00 - 23.00

Rest of week - Community use and hire: play groups, learning skills courses, private hire, functions, meetings.

MAIN ISSUES

1. Whether the sports pitch use accords with Local Plan policies, the New Towns Act Approval and Council leisure strategies

2. Changes in the nature of the current park

3. The impact on residential amenity

4. Access, traffic and parking

PLANNING POLICY

Milton Keynes Local Plan D1 Impact of Development Proposals on Locality D2 Design of Buildings NE1 Nature Conservation Sites T10 Traffic T11 Traffic Assessments T15 Parking Provision L1 Facilities Acceptable in the Parks System L2 Protection of Public Open Space and Existing Facilities L4 Sites Allocated for New Facilities C9 Reserve Sites Appendix C9 Reserve Sites

Also relevant are PPG17 Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation PPG24 Planning and Noise PPS9 Biodiversity and geological Conservation

Milton Keynes Playing Pitch Strategy 2003

CONSULTATIONS

The Assistant Director, Learning, Leisure and Culture, has written in support of the application. The area which is being proposed for development has been earmarked for a community sports facility since 1990, and the application matches the recommendations made in the Council's Playing Pitch Strategy in terms of the development of rugby and softball/baseball in Milton Keynes. The development follows precedents that have been established with other public open spaces and their dual use as a community sports facility, examples being at Woughton On The Green, Medbourne and Tattenhoe.

Land Use Strategy comment on the planning policy aspects as follows:

The site comprises of 2 parts, reserve site 126 and an area of recreation and open space as identified in the adopted Local Plan. In Table C9 of the Local Plan, reserve site 126 is not identified for any specific community use. Only commercial and church uses are excluded as potential future uses. The proposed use for a community sports pavilion is acceptable in policy terms.

The existing area of recreation and open space is identified in the Local Plan, policy L4. The policy refers to the fact that the open space at Emerson Valley has been set aside for playing fields, including changing facilities. The proposals are in line with this and therefore acceptable in policy terms. Therefore it is recommended that, subject to the application being acceptable in design terms (policies D1, D2A and D2), with primary considerations being the impact of floodlights and the increase in parking and traffic, that permission be granted.

The Chief Environmental Health Officer recommends a condition requiring a ground investigation, and requested that a Noise Assessment was carried out by an independent acoustic consultant. That assessment has been carried out in accordance with the correct methodology and makes several recommendations in line with the relevant Planning Policy Guidance, British Standards, Guidance of the National Playing Fields Association, Sport England, the World Health Organisation and the Institute of Acoustics Good Practice Guide, which should form the basis of conditions to be applied to any permission. The conditions recommended relate to limiting noise levels from fixed plant, double glazing and limiting in-house sound systems, managing the car parking areas, floodlighting and use of pitches to cease at 21:00, all music entertainment to cease at 23:00, siting of pitches 30 metres from dwellings, and control of hours of work during construction.

Natural England has no objection but has commented on the effects floodlighting could have on bat and moth populations within the Howe Park Wood SSSI. They would wish to see mitigation built into any approval to reduce or negate the impact of floodlights, which should include hoods to the floodlights and the use of sodium rather than mercury lighting. There is no evidence that the likely impact on other species have been considered. Have species surveys relevant to the site been conducted?

The Landscape Services Manager considers this a positive use for this area of open space.

Shenley Brook End and Tattenhoe Parish Council wish to lodge a number of objections.

1. They reiterate their views expressed during the consultation on the project and the Playing Pitch Strategy 2003 that this is an inappropriate location for this project. The east flank of Milton Keynes is a more suitable location.

2. Emerson Valley is a settled and established community built around the park, which gives a sense of character and place. Residents moving in would have been aware of future sports development but the land use map would have shown this to be mixed sports, offering variety and choice to the local community. Instead they are faced with the importation of two minority sports (one winter, one summer) which would have been more easily accommodated in the expansion areas.

3. Rugby will entail frequent use by a predominantly male group for training during the week, and matches and tournaments at weekends. This will result in loss of amenity to residents either through conflict with events or through the ground being torn to an extent where any other pastime would be dangerous. The participants and spectators would be mainly travelling from other areas, bringing additional and severe problems of traffic and parking.

4. To accommodate the playing surfaces it is intended to level upwards to create a bank in excess of 2 metres at the southern (Bowland Drive) end. This will not only face residents homes at a close distance, reducing their amenity, but will also create run off hazards from surface water. We suggest the alternative of levelling down the northern end and reducing the height of the pavilion.

5. The operation of floodlights is a concern, bringing problems of light spillage onto properties and generally intrusive backlighting. Although the number of poles is not great they are extremely tall and light spread is virtually certain. If approved we ask that rigorous restrictions are imposed on hours of use and enforced.

6. Although the pavilion design has been dramatically improved since the first consultation, this has not been taken to a logical conclusion. The building is still a bleakly functional modernistic structure which will sit badly against the existing properties. If the suggested relevelling took place it would be possible to reduce the height of the pavilion, which has been designed to allow spectators to see over the bank of the field. It would then become less intrusive and could be further integrated by the use of pastel colours instead of the proposed stark white finish. Pastel colours would also alleviate maintenance problems and costs. We also suggest that the flat roof must be revised, as its operational life will be short and maintenance high.

7. During consultation, it was indicated that there would be strict conditions imposed upon the club with regard to ground maintenance so that the park would be useable by residents, and that at least one resident would be involved in the management committee to represent local views. Neither of these appear in the plans.

8. There is grave concern among residents that the premises will be licenced, because of the disruption that could arise from the consumption of alcohol, especially with people arriving and leaving outside match times, and even late into the night. If the hall is available for hire as suggested, these problems will be greatly aggravated by users who would have no reason to respect the neighbours.

9. We consider the traffic assessment to be flawed by its reliance on current traffic and its failure to anticipate growth in volume from the introduction of women's rugby, increased youth participation and possible promotion to a more senior division. Any growth in membership will result in increased traffic, since most members and visitors will arrive by car, for which the planned parking will prove inadequate, and without consideration of multiple match days and tournaments. This will lead to inconsiderate parking on estate roads, adding to congestion and encouraging rat-running. The access is immediately adjacent to the grid road, and the movement of large numbers of vehicles will cause localised congestion, worsened by the growth of traffic from other venues. Tattenhoe Leisure Facility has shown a substantial growth in demand. Langerstone Lane, opposite Bowland Drive, is a major access route for this sports facility and there will be conflict. Similarly Westcroft District Centre is growing in importance and attracting large numbers using the V2 grid road. The construction of Kingsmead South and Tattenhoe Park will also increase traffic.

10. We ask that planning permission is refused, and for time to address the committee.

The Environment Agency recommends conditions on foul and surface water drainage.

The Access Group MK make observations on the need for make provision for disabled access.

REPRESENTATIONS

To date, there have been received 179 letters and e-mails in support of the application, from a wide range of addresses within and beyond Milton Keynes, making the following comments:

1. The rugby club facility at Greenleys is of poor quality and subject to vandalism. This proposal would offer good quality sports facilities needed for the development of the game.

2. This is a great opportunity to promote rugby and baseball in Milton Keynes, and provide a valuable sports facility for the area.

3. This is a good opportunity for encouraging children to participate in sport to fight obesity, and for the local community to enjoy a quality sports facility.

4. Olney RFC are a good example of a local social facility offering a venue for weddings and other functions.

5. There are not many baseball facilities in the UK. A purpose-built diamond and clubhouse would be a huge boost for the area, and give MK a chance of hosting tournaments.

6. The facility will be properly managed with consideration for local residents.

7. The original proposals have been modified in response to local concerns about parking and floodlighting.

8. Too many sports areas have been given over to development e.g. school sites.

9. The site has always been earmarked as a sports ground and should go ahead.

10. The park is little used at present.

11. The car park could be used to alleviate congestion in Bowland Drive when parents drop/pick up at school.

12. There are several schools nearby which could use the facility.

13. It is good to see a partnership between two sports, which provide male, female and youth participation.

Included in the representations in support are letters from the Rugby Union, Wasps RFC, Bucks RFU, the coach at Milton Keynes RFU, the British Baseball Federation, Sport Milton Keynes and Baseball/Softball UK.

Against the development, there have been received 199 letters and e-mails, mainly from Emerson Valley residents, expressing the following objections:

1. Emerson Valley is a quiet residential area.

2. The development goes against the wishes of the local community. 340 people have signed a petition against it. They are appalled that, despite residents objections, the scheme has reached formal planning stage, with little change to the initial plans.

3. The proposal will change the character from a recreational park to a sports facility. The scale is too large. There are too many pitches using up all of the greenspace available for the local community.

4. The park is well-used and valued for informal recreation such as dog walking, kite flying, children's play, picnics.

5. The use of the pitches will turn the ground into mud, unsuitable for other activities.

6. The use of the park will be restricted to only 2 sports. The description as a community sports facility is misleading.

7. With rugby in winter and baseball in summer, there will be no respite in its use.

8. There will be no benefits for local residents, only problems. Emerson Valley does not need another community facility. It has two already.

9. No MKRFC members live in Emerson Valley.

10. Other rugby clubs in the UK are not located in residential areas.

11. Although aware that the park was to have tennis, and , rugby is a loud and aggressive sport and a minority sport in which not many local residents participate.

12. Area may become fenced off from public use.

13. Why does the Council consider it appropriate to fund the development of a rugby facility in the middle of a residential area, simply to release funds from central government.

14. All the funding is not in place, and will drain capitol from other potential schemes.

15. Why not use the money to develop their existing ground.

16. MKRFC's current grounds have been sold to EP for development, therefore this is MKC's compensation to the club.

17. What is needed is a smaller but more inclusive development.

18. Houses have been built too close to the park for a project of this size.

19. Why could not the club ground share or amalgamate with Bletchley RFC, or use part of Windmill Hill Golf Course, or the stadium.

20. The relocation would result in 2 clubs in the south of the city, and none in the north.

21. The site is on a plateau which dominates the area.

22. Posts and 15 metre floodlights will be detrimental to the area.

23. Relevelling of the ground will result in the pitches being 2.1m higher at Harenden Croft end which, together with planting proposals, will put dwellings below ground level, enclose their front boundary, block direct access to the park, reduce daylighting, and completely change the appearance of the park.

24. It is inappropriate to site such a facility at the entrance to the estate.

25. The design of the pavilion does not accord with the character of the area.

26. Access onto the V2 is a very busy junction, with the access to Tattenhoe staggered. The increase in traffic could create an accident black spot.

27. Increased traffic on Bowland Drive will cause safety issues for children.

28. Traffic levels have been understated. Examination of the clubs fixture lists over the past 3 years have identified many instances when 2 teams play at home, and some when 3 teams play at home. The parking surveys do not cover the worst case scenario with all teams playing at home.

29. The proposed parking provision of 110 spaces will be inadequate to fully meet demand, and will lead to parking on Bowland Drive, Wenning Lane and Hareden Croft.

30. On-street parking will block access for emergency services and buses.

31. The development could result in increased car crime.

32. Estate roads would become rat-runs.

33. There would be increased carbon emissions from vehicles.

34. There would be noise from traffic, parking and the use of the sports facilities. Car noise at closing times, noise from spectators, noise from functions at the pavilion.

35. The pavilion has no air-conditioning, therefore, doors and windows will be left open.

36. There will be an impact during construction of noise and traffic, on the school.

37. The floodlights will cause light pollution and disturbance to residents, especially when trying to get children to sleep.

38. Will the floodlighting conform to the Institute of Lighting Engineers Guidance Note for Reduction of Obtrusive Light?

39. The metal halide lamps will produce blue/white light which will give the impression of higher light levels compared to existing street lighting.

40. If the club gets promoted they would have to upgrade floodlighting to Rugby Federation rules i.e. more and brighter lights.

41. The time switches on floodlights are not always foolproof.

42. The licensed premises will bring alcohol related problems - antisocial behaviour, drink driving.

43. Emerson Valley has a ban on alcohol being consumed outside - how will this be observed by the club, or enforced?

44. The use will increase problems of litter and rubbish.

45. The use may result in damage to nearby property and passing vehicles.

46. The development would not comply with Policies L1 and L2 of the Local Plan.

47. The development would result in a loss of wildlife and habitat - birds, foxes, bats and trees.

48. There would be an impact on Howe Park Wood SSSI from the floodlights affecting bats. The Council is under a legal duty by virtue of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 to take reasonable steps to protect the SSSI. What measures have been included to protect biodiversity?

49. Milton Keynes Council is making a judgement on its own application.

50. Chemicals will be used on the pitches.

During the consultation process a petition from Emerson Valley Residents Action Group with 340 signatures was submitted opposing the development.

CONSIDERATIONS

Policy

The site comprises of two parts, an existing area of recreation and open space and reserve site 126. In Appendix C9 of the Local Plan the reserve site is not identified for any specific community use. Only churches, employment and other commercial uses are excluded as potential uses. The proposed use for a community sports pavilion is acceptable in policy terms. The existing area of recreation and open space is identified in Policy L4 of the Local Plan as a new local park. The text of the policy identifies that space has been set aside in Emerson Valley for playing fields including changing facilities. The changes proposed by the application are in line with these policies.

The New Towns Act approval for Emerson Valley North includes a Land Use and Development Plan, which shows the existing open space laid out for 2 rugby pitches, 3 soccer pitches, an overlapping cricket square, tennis courts, green and a pavilion with car parking at the northern end by the mound adjacent to Wenning Lane. The car park has been constructed and the hedges planted to enclose a future bowling green and tennis courts, but none of the sports facilities have yet been provided. The land was intended for mixed sports use. The MKC Playing Pitch Strategy, June 2003, identified a shortfall of 2 senior, 1 junior and 1 mini rugby pitch by 2011. It states that with the addition of 2 pitches at Emerson Valley there should be sufficient capacity to cater for all rugby needs. This is due to the maximisation of use of the pitches with senior men's games played on Saturdays, while other teams play on Sundays. However, the strategy assumes the continued use of Greenleys pitches for rugby.

Access, Traffic and Parking

The access to the pavilion and its car park will be taken off Bowland Drive, some 80 metres from the grid road, before the junction with Windfold Lane or any residential access. Given its position close to the grid road, the majority of the traffic using the sports facility will not need to travel through any built-up part of Emerson Valley.

The junction capacity and traffic levels using Bowland Drive and the V2 are analysed in the Transport Assessment. Traffic counts carried out on a Saturday afternoon are compared with the expected peak arrival and departure traffic levels taken from surveys of the existing rugby club activity at Field Lane, Greenleys. These established the following.

Arrivals Departures 14.00 - 15.00 75 28 16.30 - 17.30 9 62

At these times traffic flows on Bowland Drive are very low, e.g. 14.00 - 15.00 two-way flow of 106 vehicles. The capacity of the V2 junction was tested. The key statistic is the ratio of flow to capacity (RFC). If this is less than 1.0, there is capacity at the junction although above 0.85 there would be congestion problems. Using the existing and predicted flows through the junction, the maximum RFC values on any arm are predicted:-

14.00 - 15.00 16.30 - 17.30 Existing 0.072 0.078 With development 0.086 0.132

This analysis demonstrates that there would be plenty of spare capacity and the impact over existing flows is small. There would be no queuing at the junction on any of the arms. The times of park flows for the sports facility at the weekends and evenings do not coincide with peak residential or school use of Bowland Drive or the grid road.

A parking survey was carried out at the existing club in Greenleys on a Saturday, Sunday and Thursday in February. Parking demand was lowest on the Thursday training night, when a maximum of 20 cars were parked at the club. On Sunday, for mini-rugby the peak parking at the club was 65 cars, and parking on Field Lane adjoining the club was consistent with residential demand, so 65 cars would be a good indicator for maximum parking demand for mini-rugby.

On Saturday 17th February, the first team was playing Bletchley at home, a local derby at which travelling supporters might be expected to attend. 61 cars filled the club's parking, and a further 37 parked on adjoining streets, giving a total of 98. As only the first team was playing at home that day, a further survey was carried out on 10th March, when the first and second teams were at home. This established a maximum of 103 cars. The planned capacity at Emerson Valley is 110 spaces. The Council's adopted Parking Standard for a leisure facility of this floorspace would be 34 spaces, but in this case it is considered appropriate to make adequate on-site provision to meet parking demand. While there may be occasions when this capacity is exceeded on Saturday afternoons, there is additional public parking available opposite along Wenning Lane and at the local centre. Any on-street parking would not necessarily cause highway danger or obstruction, as on-street residential parking occurs further down Bowland Drive, and peak usage of the pavilion is likely to be Saturday afternoons and Sunday mornings when general traffic flows are not at their highest levels.

The Highway Engineer has no objections to the proposal, subject to minor revisions of the access and parking arrangements and to conditions.

Changes in the nature of the park.

Although the New Towns Act approval and the adopted Local Plan propose that the area will be development for sports facilities, the area surrounding the park has been developed, and the houses occupied, with the park laid out as an informal, grassed open space. Residents are therefore used to the area being open and used only for passive leisure activities, such as dog waling and children's play.

The proposal would use the whole of the park for formal playing pitches, with only the margins around the pitches left for full public access. No fencing is proposed around the pitches, so that public access would still be available when matches are not being played. Nevertheless the layout for sports use will alter the character of the existing park and the playing of rugby from September to April will churn up some parts of the pitches, making it less attractive for informal use. All of the public footpaths around and across the park will remain with only some minor diversions, and this would allow people to walk their dogs through the park in all weathers.

The northern part of the park is relatively level, and can accommodate one rugby pitch with only the disturbance of installing underground drainage pipes, and the addition of goal posts and pitch white lining. The southern part of the park slopes significantly down to the south east corner next to Bowland Drive and Hareden Croft. In order to make the slope acceptable for 2 sports pitches, it is proposed to import inert fill material to progressively increase the height of the land from the north to the south. The increase in ground level will range from 0 - 2.1 metres, with the majority of the site having less than 0.5 metres land raising. However, in the south east corner, when land raising will be greatest, this would be approximately 21 metres from the closest houses, 23 Bowland Drive and 3 Hareden Croft. These properties are already sited at lower ground levels than the existing park, and cross sections submitted with the application indicate that the raised pitches could be between 2.5 - 3.1m above the ground floor levels of adjacent houses. This, together with the proposed landscaping around the pitch, would eliminate views from ground floor windows of the closest houses, but would not be so close as to cause loss of daylight or serious detriment to their amenity as to justify refusal. The Council would normally require only a 14 metre separation distance between a house and a 2 storey gable end elevation of another building (which would generally be 5m high to the eaves and 7-8m high to the ridge). A ground level rise of 2.1m at a distance of 21 metres would therefore be considered acceptable by normal development standards. The raising of the ground levels would however require the importation of approximately 20,000 cubic metres of material, representing around 1000 lorry movements into the site.

The other significant visual change would be the development of the clubhouse building and car parking on the reserve site close to the estate entrance. The clubhouse design is a contemporary, flat roofed, rendered box, with contrasting panels of cedar cladding and dark grey polished blockwork. The illustrations portray a simple but elegant structure with glazed balconies facing the road and the pitches. While the form and materials do not reflect those found generally within the locality, it is considered that the design would be attractive and distinctive, and would not detract from the quality of the area. The car parking area would be partly screened from the road by additional shrub and tree planting, and split into smaller areas by drainage ponds and softened by having 2 areas laid out as re-inforced grassed parking areas. Overall, the pavilion and its parking is considered to be acceptable.

Impact upon local residents

There has been strong local objection to the change in the nature of the existing park to sports pitches, and moreover to the use of the pitches and pavilion predominantly by a rugby club which has no direct linkages to Emerson Valley. The objectors see this as a loss of their park to an outside, minority sport, with no benefit for local residents. However, the New Towns Act approval, the adopted Local Plan and the Playing Pitch Strategy all propose that the park should be developed for use as sports pitches, and the areas for a future bowls green, tennis courts and car park to serve a pavilion adjacent to the mound have already been laid out in preparation for sports facilities. Although the New Towns Act approval plan indicates a mixture of sports uses, including rugby, football and cricket pitches, these also would have occupied the majority of the land for sports use. The council does not control through the planning process which sports can use a particular sports ground. This is a management issue which will be determined through the Playing Pitch Leisure Strategy or the demand for pitches at the time. The use for rugby and baseball/softball has been identified as a priority through the Leisure Strategy.

The pitches will not be enclosed by fencing, and the park would be available for public use at all times when not required for organised sports. It is not anticipated that sports will regularly occupy all 4 rugby pitches at the same time. A condition to preclude the erection of fences is recommended.

The application proposes the erection of three 15m high flood lights around part of 1 rugby pitch, furthest from housing (70 metres minimum). Three floodlights will not be sufficient to light a full pitch, but will enable rugby training to take place on Tuesday and Thursday evenings. A time-switch is proposed to cut the lighting off at 21:00 hours, and a condition is recommended. The floodlighting details submitted with the application show that the floodlighting is directed towards the training area and light levels reduce to zero well before the surrounding housing. While the floodlights will create a pool of bright light on the pitch, in an area that was previously dark, they will not increase light levels at the nearest house. As the site lies opposite to Howe Park Wood, a Site of special Scientific Interest containing a population of bats and moths, Natural England have recommended that mitigation measures are built into any approval, including the addition of hoods and the use of sodium rather than mercury lighting. Subject to a condition on mitigation, Natural England has no objection.

Local residents have raised objections for reasons of increase traffic or parking, but the Transport Assessment indicates that the additional traffic arising from the use of the pavilion and sports facility would have no material adverse impact on Bowland Drive or its junction with the grid road, Tattenhoe Street, which will operate well below its design capacity. As the site access is the first turn off Bowland Drive - no traffic will need to go through Emerson Valley. The Transport Assessment indicates that the 110 parking spaces will be adequate for all normal use of the facility, given the maximum numbers of cars recorded at the Greenleys site. Additional on-street parking cannot be wholly ruled out, at peak times, but these are likely to be occasional Saturday afternoons when 2 or more sides are playing at home. The amount of parking (110 spaces) far exceeds the Council's parking standard (34 spaces) for a building of this size, but is considered appropriate to cater for the known peaks of parking demand on site, in order to minimise any parking problems for the area. The Council's Highway Engineer agrees with the conclusions of the transport assessment and has no objection, subject to minor alterations and to conditions.

The other main issue for local objectors is that of noise and disturbance. Potential noise sources include traffic and parking, use of the pavilion, and use of the pitches. While no traffic needs to pass through the residential areas, the proposed access would be 36 metres away from the nearest houses and one parking area would lie between the access and the nearest houses. The pavilion would be 45m from the nearest house, and the sports pitches 17m at the closest point. A noise assessment was submitted to address the potential for noise disturbance from these sources. The assessment advises that during the normal operation of the pavilion and its bar, noise from background music and television would not give rise to any disturbance. The function room would occasionally be used for discos and weddings, with a potential for loud music. Conditions are therefore recommended to restrict noise levels from the operation of the pavilion in order to protect residential amenity. Noise from the operation of external plant is also recommended to be conditioned.

Noise associated with the car park has also been assessed. Vehicle movements in the car park during the daytime would give rise to noise levels which are acceptable in accordance with British Standard BS 5233. However, vehicles departing from the closest car park after 11pm would have the potential to cause disturbance. The report recommends that this area should be regulated to restrict its use only to when the pavilion is fully occupied. However, as this would be difficult to control in practice, it is considered more effective to require bunding or fencing between this car park and the nearest houses, in addition to car park management.

There are no specific noise limits relating to acceptable use of sports pitches. Sport England guidance recommends that pitches should be 30m from residential properties. This is not achievable for the proposed layout for 4 pitches. The 2 pitches closest to the pavilion will be 16 and 17 metres away from the nearest houses in Bowland Drive and Austwick Lane. However, the use of these rugby pitches is likely to be limited to approximately 2 hours on Saturday afternoons and 2 hours on Sunday mornings.

The Environmental Health Officer has recommended a number of conditions and only the 30 metre separation between pitches and houses are considered appropriate.

The increased potential for anti-social behaviour, and contravention of the Drinking Control Area regulations are also cited by local residents as reasons for their objection to the proposed rugby club. All of Shenley Brook End parish is subject to Drinking Control Area regulations in which the consumption of alcohol, outside of licenced premises, which has the potential to lead to anti social activity and behaviour, can be the subject of a £500 fine. It is proposed that the pavilion will have a licenced bar which would not be affected by the Drinking Control regulations. However, if drinks are taken outside the pavilion, eg by spectators watching a game, and if their consumption of alcohol is deemed to be giving rise to anti-social behaviour, then the police can intervene to confiscate the drinks and/or take further legal action to prevent public nuisance. The regulations were introduced because of drinking and anti-social behaviour problems in parts of the estate, including this park.

CONCLUSION

The proposed sports facility will bring about a change to the nature of the existing park area and its current use for low-key informal recreation by local residents. Its layout for sports pitches, and its use for games on Saturdays afternoons and Sunday mornings and for training on 2 evenings per week, will curtail, public access but will not prevent the public from walking through the site at anytime or using the site when games are not taking place. The objectors see this reduction in the appearance and access to the park as having no benefits for local residents, and only the disbenefits of increased traffic, parking, noise and disturbance imposed by an outside sports organisation. The raising of the ground level in the south east corner will have a significant impact on the views and setting of 4 hours, but not to a degree that would justify refusal.

However, the park is allocated for sports pitches in the adopted Local Plan and the Council's Playing Pitch Strategy, and was always envisaged for sports use by the New Towns Act Approval Masterplan. The impact of the additional traffic and parking has been assessed, and existing roads and junctions would not be overloaded and would continue to operate well below their designed capacity. Considerable parking provision has been made onsite to meet all normal requirements, and could not be considered inadequate for the proposed use. The proposed 3 floodlights are to be sited furthest away from existing houses, and will not cause increased light levels at these properties. The potential noise from traffic, the pavilion and the use of the sports pitches has been assessed and, subject to suitable conditions to safeguard residential amenity, is not considered to unduly detrimental to nearby residents. The proposed design and materials of the pavilion will be different to the buildings in the area, but the building is considered to be of good quality in its appearance.

RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions on access, parking, levels, drainage, floodlighting, noise controls and mitigation, materials, landscaping, no fencing, site controls during construction, ground contamination and ground surface treatment.

Report author / case officer – Alan Mills Contact details - 01908 252412 [email protected]