A report by Head of Planning Applications Group to Planning Applications Committee on 16 March 2004.

Transcription

1 Proposed adult education centre, performing arts facility, domed tennis court covering and replacement hard play area, The A report by Head of Planning Applications Group to Planning Applications Committee on 16 March Proposal: Extension to existing school buildings to provide new facilities for Kent Adult Education service plus alterations and additions to provide a new performing arts facility with larger assembly hall and kitchen; and a new freestanding domed tennis court covering and replacement hard play area, The Canterbury High School, Knight Avenue, Canterbury. Recommendation: Permission be granted subject to conditions. Local Member: Ms JE Butcher Unrestricted Site 1. The Canterbury High School is located on Knight Avenue, off the A2050 Rheims Way, to the west of Canterbury city centre. To the north of the school site is the Victoria Memorial Recreation Ground, to the south are two railway lines, to the west is Beauherne Community School and to the north-west is housing along Knight Avenue. The school site comprises the main block of 1 to 3 storey buildings with a sports centre and stadium to the east and playing fields to the south-west. The playing fields (and the proposed hard play area see below) are included within an existing area of Open Space designated in the Canterbury District Local Plan. A site location plan and a copy of the applicant s site plan are attached, along with various elevation drawings. Proposal 2. The application has been submitted on behalf of The Canterbury High School and KCC Education and Libraries and proposes an extension to existing school buildings and other additions, to provide: new Adult Education Centre (re-located from St. John s Place, Kingsmead); a performing arts centre for the school with larger assembly hall and kitchen; a new freestanding domed tennis court covering; and replacement hard play area. 3. The applicants have provided written justification for each component of the proposed development: Adult Education Centre (AEC) Adult Education currently uses accommodation within the Kingsmead area of Canterbury, which comprises remodelled Victorian infant school buildings with ancillary 1940 s HORSA buildings. [ ] There is limited scope for expansion and the buildings do not comply with the current Disability Discrimination laws. The proposed [development at the Kingsmead facility] would include the Adult Education centre and therefore relocation would be inevitable. D4.1

2 CANTERBURY PLAN D4.2

3 SITE LOCATION PLAN D4.3

4 DETAILED LAYOUT PLAN D4.4

5 ELEVATIONS D4.5

6 SPORTSDOME D4.6

7 Within the [proposed] purpose built accommodation there would be facilities available to offer a wide range of courses ranging from one-day family specials at weekends to qualifications in ICT, healthcare, GCSE s and arts subjects. Particular emphasis would be given to emplyability skills training [ ] which would be delivered on flexible basis with learners able to attend at times to suit their lifestyles. [ ] A significant benefit of this complex is its close proximity to the housing estate nearby and every attempt would be made to encourage community use of the facilities. Performing arts facility, etc The Canterbury High School already selects 15% of its students according to musical aptitude and this development is designed to enable students to perform at a higher standard. [ ] It would also provide more suitable catering facilities and a larger assembly hall which have been urgently needed since the school moved onto one site 15 years ago. It is possible that some parts of this facility may be available for public use. This dual development [the AEC and performing arts facilities] would release spaces in the existing school building so that more suitable office accommodation could be provided. Domed sportshall and playground It is intended to cover two of the existing school tennis courts so that they could better provide for the rapid growth in interest the school is experiencing in tennis. To offset the loss of outside play area it is intended to provide a floodlit playground adjacent to the existing sports centre on an area of the field that is too small to accommnodate a grass sports pitch. Both would be available to the wide community and managed by the schools existing operator. Siting and design 4. The applicants confirm that the proposed adult education centre would be sited close to the entrance gates to enable the School to manage the presence of adults on site. The Adult Education and performing arts/hall elements would be new build, steel framed structures. The AEC building would be 2-3 storeys high; the performing arts centre 2 storeys. Second storey works over existing buildings would utilise lightweight construction such as timber frame. The existing kitchens would need to be demolished and relocated to accommodate the development. Other elements of the proposal would involve adaptation of existing buildings. The roof would be a standing seam pitched roof and the external walls would be fair faced blockwork, with permanent steel shuttering at the level of the upper floors Travel implications 5. The existing access to the school from Knight Avenue would be retained. Knight Avenue is a single carriageway residential access road, which has been extensively traffic calmed with build-outs and speed cushions over the past 10 years. It serves the London Road housing estate and forms the main point of access onto Rheims Way. D4.7

8 6. In terms of non-car travel, the applicants state that there are direct pedestrian routes to the city centre via underpasses and lightly trafficked roads, whilst National Cycle Route 1 runs just north of the site. Canterbury bus station can be accessed via a 20 minute frequency bus service to London Road Estate, which also serves Canterbury West rail station. The bus station is a 25-minute walk from the site and Canterbury East rail station is 12 minute walk. 7. There are 114 full time and 33 part time staff currently employed at the school, and these numbers would not change as a result of the proposed development. The existing AEC at St John s Place accommodates around 300 students and staff each week day, although 120 of these attend classes held in the evening. 8. The school currently has 140 parking spaces, plus 5 spaces for buses and coaches. There are 20 additional spaces on site used by the Body and Mind fitness centre only. The proposal would involve the loss of 23 parking spaces where built development is proposed but these would be replaced by 23 new spaces located on the current bus parking area, with different marking for bus spaces and car spaces provided. These spaces would be managed by the AEC and kept clear during the school bus embarkation time. The school has 40 cycle parking spaces on site, with changing and locker facilities available to students. Based on AEC user levels, the applicants predict that 60 additional cycle parking spaces would be required on site. 9. In terms of a Travel Plan, an outline plan has been provided by the applicants, and they state that School and the Adult Education Centre would work together in bringing forward a combined Travel Plan, setting targets, monitoring progress and reporting results, in co-operation with authorities and other Canterbury groups. The Travel Plan would be initiated upon the planning application being granted consent. Background 10. Canterbury High School (formerly Frank Hooker School) has been at Knight Avenue since 1954 and provides secondary comprehensive education to 1050 students. Recent developments at the site include a new sports centre and running track stadium, in line with the school specialising in sports academia. A Body and Mind fitness centre opened at the site in 2001, and provides a fitness facility used by both the school and members of the public. Previous planning permissions granted for the site include a new sports science classroom / viewing platform, granted July 2002 (Ref. CA/02/649). Government Guidance 11. The following Planning Policy Guidance is relevant to this application: PPG13 Transport - Emphasises the integration of planning and transport at all geographical levels. Aims to promote more sustainable transport choices and accessibility by public transport, walking and cycling, and to reduce the need to travel, especially by car. States that schools should be located so as to maximise their accessibility by public transport, walking and cycling; proposals for new schools should be accompanied by a School Travel Plan. D4.8

9 Development Plan Policies 12. The following Development Plan Policies are relevant to this application: Kent Structure Plan 1996 / Kent & Medway Structure Plan: Deposit Plan September 2003 S1 S2 S9 ENV15 ENV20 T1 Local planning authorities will seek to achieve a sustainable pattern and form of development which will reduce the need to travel, facilitate the conservation of energy and other natural and environmental resources, and minimise pollution. (This policy is carried forward - in part - in the form of Policy TP1, which sets out Assessment Criteria for Transport Proposals, and Policy QL13 (set under S9 below)). The quality of Kent s environment, including the visual, aural, ecological, atmospheric and water environments, will be conserved and enhanced, and measures will be taken to minimise, and where appropriate, mitigate, any adverse impacts arising from development and land use change. Local Authorities will have regard to the need for community facilities and services, including education, health and cultural facilities. (This policy is carried forward in the form of Policy QL13 of the emerging Kent & Medway Structure Plan, which provides for the development of new community services and infrastructure, and states that such developments will be located where they are accessible by walking and cycling and by public transport from the area they serve, and wherever practical they will be located in town, district or local centres). The character, quality and functioning of Kent s built environment will be conserved and enhanced. Development should be well designed and respect its setting. (This policy is carried forward in the form of Policy QL1 - which relates to the quality of development and design - of the emerging Kent & Medway Structure Plan). Development will be required to be planned and designed so as to avoid or minimise pollution impacts. Where such impacts cannot be reduced to an acceptable level, or together with prevailing background pollution it would produce an unacceptable level, the proposed development will not be permitted. (This policy is carried forward in the form of Policy QL1 of the emerging Kent & Medway Structure Plan, which states that the design of developments should protect of the amenity of residents). The provision of facilities which will assist pedestrians, cyclists and the use of buses and trains will be promoted where appropriate. (This policy is carried forward in the form of Policy TP2 of the emerging Kent & Medway Structure Plan, which states amongst other matters that Local Planning Authorities should ensure that development sites would be well served by public transport, walking and cycling and that Travel Plans are established for larger developments that generate significant demand for travel). D4.9

10 SR2 Development of an appropriate range and standard of facilities for sports and formal recreation will be provided for. Such facilities should be well-related to the transport network and normally be located: (a) at settlements, on sites capable of being served by public transport and well-related to the footpath network; or (b) in the countryside, only if built development is small in scale, ancillary to an outdoor recreation use, and unobtrusively located, and provided that proposals will not require damaging change to the landscape or natural features, or harm wildlife or rural amenity. (This policy is carried forward in the form of Policy QL16 of the emerging Kent & Medway Structure Plan). Canterbury District Local Plan 1998 / Canterbury District Local Plan First Review Deposit Draft D1 D38 D39 The City Council will permit development of high standard design which: (a) is sympathetic to the appearance and character of the surrounding area and appropriate in scale, density, mass, appearance, materials, layout and siting, having regard to the adjoining buildings, spaces and views; [ ] (e) avoids unduly interfering, disturbing or conflicting with adjoining uses [ ]. (This policy is carried forward in the form of Policy BE1 of the emerging Local Plan, which states that the Council will have regard to amongst other matters the privacy and amenity of the existing environment). Proposals which would result in the loss of protected open space will only be permitted if: (a) there would be no material harm to the contribution the open space makes to the visual or recreational amenity of the area; (b) the loss would be outweighed by the need for the development; (c) there is no alternative site available, or an equivalent area could be provided. (This policy is carried forward in the form of Policy C20 of the emerging Local Plan). Proposals which would result in the loss, in whole or part, of playing fields will only be permitted if: (a) the loss would be outweighed by an overriding need for the development; or (b) recreation facilities can best be retained through the re-development of a small part of the site; and (c) an equivalent area could be provided; or (d) new land for public open space will be provided. (This policy is carried forward in the form of Policy C21 of the emerging Local Plan). D4.10

11 Consultations 13. Canterbury City Council: No objection; provides the following comments: The City Council [ ] would wish to resist the use of the area notated as "possible future car parking" for that purpose; [ ] traffic movements to the rear of properties in Knight Avenue should be minimised and that there should be no car parking in this area or any vehicular access to Beauherne School. The City Council recommends that the sports hall dome be orientated along an eastwest axis in order to minimise it's apparent bulk, that the colouring of it should be muted and that additional screen planting should be introduced between the sports hall and the rear of the Knight Avenue dwellings in order to help mitigate the visual impact of this large structure. Attention is drawn to the advice of the County Archaeological Advisor as to the need for a formal evaluation of archaeological matters and to the advice of Southern Water Services regarding submission of a drainage scheme. The plans are a little unclear as to which areas of the building would be panelling and which would be windows and care would need to be exercised to avoid undue overlooking of adjoining properties. Environment Agency: No comments received. Southern Water: No objection, subject to conditions including the protection/diversion of the public sewer that currently runs under the application site, and the submission of details of foul and surface water disposal. County Transport Operations Officer: Provides the following comments: The expected traffic levels on Knight Avenue, although would be higher than at present, should not cause too many problems. The AEC have shown that through staggering their start and finish times so that they do not clash with the schools, disruption should be minimised. It is likely that a degree of queuing would occur after the afternoon session at the AEC ends, however this should only be for a short period of time. Recommended conditions should permission be granted: The draft Travel Plan submitted by the applicants transport consultants should be adopted by the School and AEC and developed into a fully working Travel Plan. A revised Travel Plan should then be submitted a year after the AEC is opened, and again the following year. As part of the investigation / data collection for the Travel Plan parking surveys would be necessary on site as well as on the public highway in the vicinity of the school site (to establish any increase in off site parking) both before and after the AEC is opened (nature of surveys to be agreed with the Area Office). This office would be pleased to offer assistance and advise in progressing the Travel Plan. Many of the transport aspects of this application rely on the existing modal split as demonstrated from the current AEC site in the city centre. The new site may well see a change from the current modal split due to it being less central in location to D4.11

12 the rest of the city and in comparison with the existing site. The amount of car parking allowed for by the proposals may not be sufficient for its needs; and through the necessary site management there may be a degree of over spill parking on the public highway. As such, through the further development of the Travel Plan and monitoring of the car parking near to the site, should it be found that excessive on street parking by users of Canterbury High School and the new AEC are causing problems for local residents then additional parking on site should be provided (numbers and layout to be approved by the Area Office). Funds for this additional parking should be in place enabling them to be constructed as and when necessary. Babtie (Noise): Provides the following comments: The proposed freestanding domed tennis court covering would reduce any noise impacts from the playing of tennis. The replacement hard play area is located towards the east side of the site away from the nearest residential properties and screened by the school building. It would not have any impact. The architect states that the performing arts hall would be an enclosed windowless space. There is no indication of a ventilation system for the performing arts hall or for the classrooms to the north, to ensure windows can be kept closed at all times. Delivery Vehicles: I accept that there are already deliveries along the service road. It would be beneficial to ensure that deliveries do not occur outside normal hours. I suggest a condition restricting vehicles outside the hours of Additional Traffic: The architects have not dealt with additional traffic generated by the use of the performing arts centre and adult education centre. The access to the site is immediately adjacent to houses. We would like the applicant to demonstrate that this would not result in noise nuisance. County Archaeologist: The application site lies in an area of archaeological potential relating to evidence of a possible Iron Age occupation site found in 1999 during the construction of the running track. Finds of Roman pottery and coins are also recorded within a 500m radius of the site. I agree with the recommendations provided by the Canterbury Archaeological Trust to Canterbury City Council that archaeological evaluation would be an appropriate measure in this case and I have discussed the case the Trust. I advise that provision be made by condition for a programme of archaeological work, to be implemented prior to development commencing. Local Member 14. The Local Member, Ms JE Butcher, was notified of the application on 7 January No written comments have been received. Publicity and Representations 15. The application has been advertised on by way of a site notice. In addition 53 neighbours have been notified individually by letter. One written representation has been received from a private individual, and one from Canterbury Archaeological Trust: D4.12

13 A resident of St Lawrence Forstal, who teaches at the existing Kent Adult Studies Centre, states that the current facility that has the advantage of being very central, and that its relocation right out at Knight Avenue would be a major problem. Non-car users would have a problem accessing the site; bus users would have to change buses, which are not that frequent, or would have to go from the railway station to the bus station for a link. The course on the history of Canterbury involves groups of students walking into the city centre then returning within the session, and would be impossible to operate from the High School site. Canterbury Archaeological Trust: A field evaluation of the school site in 1999 revealed evidence of Iron Age occupation in the area and an evaluation of the site is recommended in advance of any grant of planning permission. Attention is drawn to the failure of the County Council to carry out a watching and recording brief imposed by its own archaeologists on a permission granted in Discussion 16. The application proposes Adult Education Centre, performing arts facility, assembly hall and kitchen, domed sports hall and replacement hard play area at Canterbury High School. The application needs to be considered in the context of the relevant Development Plan Policies, together with other material considerations. 17. The proposal has policy support in principle through Policy S9 of the Structure Plan, and to a certain extent Policy SR2, which both provide for the provision new community, educational and sporting facilities. However, a letter of objection has been received relating to the proposed Adult Education Centre, and concerns have been raised by KCC Highways and Babtie (Noise). Highway and travel 18. PPG13 and policies within the existing and emerging Structure Plan set out the importance of promoting sustainable patterns of travel and ensuring that developments are well located and conceived in terms of encouraging walking cycling and use of public transport, and that the local highway network can accommodate any vehicular traffic that is generated. However, due to the limited information on these matters within the application, I requested the preparation of both a Transport Assessment and Travel Plan in order that the County Transport Operations Manager could fully assess the proposed development. Both have now been provided. In addition, a Supplementary Transport Assessment has also been submitted to address further queries from the County Transport Operations Manager. 19. The Transport Assessment shows that the Adult Education Centre would involve an increase in staff and user numbers at the school site of approximately 300 persons per week day, although this figure could increase over time should the AE student roll increase. The performing arts facility, tennis dome and hard play area would also potentially lead to a further, small increase in site users. There would be no change to the number of staff and students attending the Canterbury High School. D4.13

14 20. Whilst the site is located further from the city centre than the existing site, it is well served by buses and although not encouraged car parking would be more readily available at the High School site than the existing St. John s Place site. However, one concern is the potential for parking over-spill onto the public highway. In response, the applicants Supplementary Transport Assessment states: The revised parking assessment has shown a maximum parking accumulation of 42 vehicles [ ] at the end of the morning AEC session [in the worst case scenario]. If parking demand is found to impact on the local highway after occupation of the development, the applicant would provide additional on-site parking [ ]. A total of 15 additional spaces could be provided on existing paved and landscaped areas with minimum disruption. However, the applicant wishes to allow the Travel Plan adequate time to have a positive effect prior to any decision on parking extensions being made. 21. Over-spill parking would not be acceptable on highway safety or amenity grounds. However, I understand that the County Transport Operations Manager is willing to accept the existing level of parking provision on the basis that measures identified in the Travel Plan would encourage travel by other means. One of the Travel Plan initiatives to promote cycling would be dependent on the provision of adequate cycle parking on site, and to this end I would advocate the inclusion of a suitable condition to ensure the provision of the 60 parking spaces anticipated to be required by AEC staff and students. 22. In addition to existing initiatives, the County Transport Operations Manager advises that should permission be granted, the outline Travel Plan already submitted should be updated within one year of the opening of the proposed AEC, and again a year later. I support this requirement and would intend for it to be conditioned. A further requirement is for the School and AEC to provide additional parking on site should excessive on street parking by site users cause problems for local residents. The Supplementary Transport Assessment indicates that such provision would be possible. 23. In terms of traffic generated by the development along Knight Avenue, and the extent of queuing at the Rheims Way roundabout, the Supplementary Transport Assessment - using data from additional traffic surveys - concludes as follows: The analysis has shown the proposal [would] have the greatest impact during the late PM period, but only increasing queues on Knight Avenue by an additional 3 vehicles, over the 1 vehicle recorded in the before development scenario. The level of additional delay is therefore insignificant. 24. Whilst indicating some initial concerns, the County Transport Operations Manager raises no objections to this level of traffic generation and potential queuing. For my part, I am aware that additional queuing traffic would create an amenity impact for houses along Knight Avenue. However, given the existing estate and school travel to this busy roundabout, I do not consider any additional impact to be significant in planning terms. D4.14

15 Visual and amenity 25. I am generally satisfied with the design and appearance of the proposed new built extension to the school, although I would want to condition the submission of details of external materials for future consideration. My only concern has been the proximity of the three storey element of the Adult Education Centre to adjacent properties, particularly no. 101 Knight Avenue. The proposed AEC building would be 16.6 metres (at its nearest) from house no. 101, and 7 metres from its garden fence, and is illustrated in the extract of the applicants plan featured earlier. Its proximity could lead to problems with overlooking and overshadowing, and whilst I am not aware of any concerns from local residents or other consultees regarding this issue, I am under an obligation to assess the amenity impacts of proposed developments and protect the future amenity of local residents. 26. In response to my concerns, the applicants state that the the impact of the form has been considered and to this extent the building is two storeys where it abuts the neighbours. Whilst this is generally the case, the building is 3 storeys at its front elevation, which is the nearest part of the building to house no Following further discussions with the applicants, I am satisfied that the issue of overlooking could be resolved by way of the use of obscured glass and/or fins attached to the exterior of the proposed building to prevent direct views. I would anticipate requiring further details of measures by condition. 27. To assess the degree of overshadowing and loss of light, I requested from the applicant shadow profiles that illustrate the times at which nearby residential properties would be shielded from direct sunlight by the proposed built development. These show that on 22 March and 22 September each year the shadow cast by the proposed built development would leave house no. 101 by around 10am, and its garden by around 11am. On 21 December the house and garden would be in shadow at 10am and free from shadow by 12pm. During summer most of the day would be shadow free. Given that the property would be largely shadow free in late morning onwards I am inclined to accept the proposed development without any alteration. I do not consider that the potential impact is significant enough to warrant a recommendation for refusal. 28. The proposed sportsdome would cover the existing tennis courts and would not therefore involve additional land-take. The dome would measure approx. 11 metres high, 36 metres wide and 36.5 metres long, and would be located 19.5 metres from the gardens of the nearest residential properties. It would be screened to some extent from neighbouring properties by the existing fencing and a single storey building, although it would still be visible above these. To minimise the dome s apparent bulk, the City Council advocates that it be orientated along an east-west axis. The submitted drawings indicate that the ridge of the dome would indeed be orientated east-west; it would also be sited at an oblique angle to the row of houses. The sportsdome would not overshadow or overlook nearby gardens and would in my view be acceptable in visual terms, although I would require clarification of the external colouring by condition, and also the submission of a scheme of landscaping. D4.15

16 29. The proposed hard play area would be located on a small grassed area away from the main part of the school and any housing. I have no objection in planning terms to this addition, subject to a condition requiring details of floodlighting. Noise and disturbance 30. The site is already used extensively by the school and some external users, including in the evening (the existing fitness centre is open to members until hours weekdays). The proposed development should be assessed based on the degree to which it would increase any existing levels of noise and disturbance, particularly at evenings and weekends. I have consulted Babtie (Noise) on this matter and it has raised some concerns regarding the potential noise impacts of the proposal. 31. In term of noise emanating from the proposed new built development, I would advise that the windows in the classrooms to the north would generally have double-glazing, although they would be also openable. The applicants have stated that if there is a problem with neighbours then the windows would have to be closed during classes. The Performing Arts hall would be an enclosed windowless space served by controlled air conditioning, so noise impacts from open windows would not arise. 32. The proposed AEC would open during the evenings (involving around 120 users and a standard end time of hours) and weekends, whilst the performing arts facility would be used occasionally by local groups at evenings and weekends. Such levels of usage may cause disruption to local residents. To restrict noise from delivery vehicles using the service road to the kitchen and performing arts facility, Babtie advocates a condition requiring deliveries between and hours and the applicants have accepted this. The applicants have also undertaken to close off the performing arts entrance after hours so that persons exiting the facility would use the main (school/aec) entrance. Babtie confirms that this undertaking, and the fact that the performing arts facility would only be used intermittently late at night, means that they are satisfied that their concerns have been taken on board by the applicants. 33. However, there would still be a potential noise impact from cars leaving the site during the evening. I would advise that a certain level of daytime and evening usage of this access already occurs, and that if Members decide to permit this application it should be understood that such usage would increase. I do not consider that the additional impacts warrant the refusal of planning permission in their own right. 34. Noise from the sportsdome should be reduced as a result of the dome covering, although the facility may be used later in the evening than previously. The applicants state that the tennis dome would be available when the sports centre is open, and would be used by a maximum of 8 people at any one time. I do not object to this level of usage in planning terms, although I would want the hours of use (up to 10.30pm) conditioned. In terms of lighting, this would be fitted inside the dome and only a glow would be apparent to local residents. Again, I do not consider that this potential impact to be significant in planning terms. 35. In terms of the proposed hard play area, although this would involve the creation of more noise (for example during 5-a-side football matches) and the addition of floodlighting, it D4.16

17 would be well away from the local residents and I have therefore no material planning objections. Other matters 36. The proposed hard play area would be located within an area of existing Open Space, protected through Policies D38 and D39 of the Local Plan. However, I am satisfied that no material harm to the contribution the open space makes to the visual or recreational amenity of the area would result, as the openness of the area would be maintained and the development is for sports related development. Although the site comprises existing playing fields, it would be too small for a regular sports pitch and is divided from the main area of playing fields by sloping ground. 37. The Canterbury Archaeological Trust requests that archaeological investigations of the site take place prior to any permission being granted, and is supported in its request by the City Council. However, after liaising with the Trust, the County Archaeologist advises that a condition requiring a programme of archaeological work to be implemented prior to development commencing would be satisfactory. I accept this advice and would also intend to add an informative stressing the importance that such a programme is undertaken given the comments of the Trust on the absence of previous works. 38. One of the submitted drawings shows a new path and fencing running within the school grounds adjacent to the gardens of properties of Knight Avenue, which would provide pedestrian access to Beauherne Community School. Such fencing would be 1.8 metes in height and would therefore require the benefit of planning permission. However, it is not referred to on the application form or within the supporting statement, and its full extent to Beauherne School is not shown on the submitted plans. For this reason I have not considered it as part of this proposal, and have not publicised the application on that basis. I would therefore intend to attach an informative to any permission advising that such fencing would require a separate consent. 39. The applicants also indicate an area of possible future car parking to the west of the proposed sportsdome on the submitted site plan. Again I would stress that such parking would require planning permission in its own right and I do consider it to be part of the current application (there is no reference to it on the application form and supporting statement only states: overflow parking could be provided to the west of the site in due course ). Canterbury City Council has raised concerns about the amenity implications of such development. I would therefore intend to attach a further informative advising that this development would require a separate consent. 40. For information, further to the comments of the resident from St Lawrence Forstal, the applicants have undertaken to provide facilities for teaching the history of Canterbury course at a city centre location. D4.17

18 Conclusion 41. In conclusion, I consider that the proposed development would provide improved educational and sporting facilities for both Canterbury High School and the wider community. I have assessed the various potential impacts on the new facilities, including the highway and travel implications, visual and amenity impacts, and noise and disturbance, and I do not consider that any of these matters are significant in planning terms as to warrant a recommendation for refusal. I therefore recommend that permission be granted, subject to the conditions as set out below. Recommendation 42. I RECOMMEND that PERMISSION BE GRANTED to the proposal SUBJECT to the following conditions: - standard time condition; - the development being carried out strictly in accordance with the plans; - hours of use of the sportsdome and performing arts facility; - delivery vehicles to service the new facilities via the service road only between the hours of ; - submission of details of external materials for the proposed built development and sportsdome, and details of measures to prevent the overlooking of nearby properties; - submission of details of additional cycle parking facilities; - submission of details of floodlighting; - submission of details of foul and surface water drainage, and the protection/diversion of the public sewer that runs under the application site; - submission of a scheme of landscaping; - submission of a programme of archaeological works; - submission of an updated joint Travel Plan within one year of the AEC opening, including the results of monitoring, a review of the parking situation on and off site, new targets to be adopted and measures proposed to tackle any transport related problems that may have arisen; and submission of a further updated Plan one year later. Case Officer: Mark Funnell Tel. no Background Documents - see section heading D4.18