Meeting documents

Mr D Periam, Planning Lead Officer, reported that since publication of the report he had received additional consultation responses. Mr Periam had circulated an addendum, appended to the minutes, to the members of the committee on Friday 29 November 2019.  The County Lead Local Flood Authority had considered the additional information submitted referred to in paragraph 17.2 of the report and now had no objection subject to the three conditions listed in the addendum.  Affinity Water, the water supply company, had not raised objection but had stated that it was important that appropriate conditions were imposed to protect the public water supply; these conditions and the informative were set out in the revised recommendation.  A further nine representations from members of the public, in support of the application, had been received and the revised schedule of conditions was set out in the addendum.

Mr Periam provided a presentation showing photographs of the:

·       Application site

·       Wider area

·       Proposed buildings

·       New multi-use games area

·       New sports hall

·       Coach access, car park and drop off zone.

Diagrams of the proposed buildings, the classroom and layout of the proposed car parking area showed the materials to be used to reflect the site's location in the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (CAONB).  Photographs were shown of the existing school car park, the access road and the area for the proposed multi-use games area.  It was intended that coaches would only use the southern end of the site.  Mr Periam showed the proximity of the local properties which would be impacted by the proposed development. There was a public footpath, which formed part of the South Bucks Way, between the hedge and fence which would be crossed by new proposed coach access.  As the site was within the CAONB and the Green Belt (GB) the application would need to be referred to the Secretary of State if the Committee were minded to support the application in order to call it in for their determination if they wished.  Mr Periam highlighted that a number of points had been raised regarding the existing highways issues, car parking on weekdays along the London Road and the number of cars at drop off and pick up times. However, not all the cars were connected to the school.  Currently, the coaches turned right when leaving the school site but it was proposed that coaches would be able to turn left or right resulting in a number of trees to be removed to meet highway vision requirements. 

Public Speaking

The Chairman invited Mrs R Dowden and Mr M Knox to read out their statements, appended to the minutes.

Mrs Dowden highlighted the following points:

• Mrs Dowden’s property had a direct view along the line of the proposed coach park and the road; however, there was no mention of Mrs Dowden’s property in the Visual Impact Assessment.
• Mrs Dowden supported the proposed development but objected to the plans to install 5 metre high lights along the line of the coach park and the road.
• The Chilterns Conservation Board had stated that the Chilterns had relatively dark skies making it a place people could still experience the wonder of starry skies and that it was good for wildlife.  Planning conditions should be applied to restrict and control light pollution.  There was no street lighting along the London Road and the coaches departed the premises by 3.30 pm when it was still daylight even in the depths of winter. 
• The coach park should be locked when not in use to prevent anti-social behaviour.
• The speed limit on London Road being at 40 mph in the vicinity of the coach and car parks.

Mr Knox stated that he was a member of the Great Missenden Village Association and that he supported the application but had the following concerns:

• The speed limit on London Road was 40 mph; this was the ideal opportunity to reduce the speed limit to improve the safety of the school children and residents.
• The coaches should only be able to turn right when leaving the site as the narrow, historic high street was very congested and could not take more traffic.
• The traffic at the busy A413/London Road junction should be managed by the installation of traffic lights or a roundabout. 

Members of the committee raised and discussed the following points:

• A member of the committee asked for clarification on the location of the junction.  Mr Knox explained it was where the London Road met the A413, near the Chiltern Hospital.  A large amount of the traffic came off the A413 which had a 50 mph limit, onto London Road.

The Chairman invited Ms J Meloni, Headteacher, The Misbourne School, to read out her statement, appended to the minutes.

Members of the committee raised and discussed the following points:

• A member of the committee asked whether the existing sports hall was used to hold examinations.  Ms Meloni clarified that exams were not held in the sports hall and that other areas of the school were used putting pressure on the accommodation.
• A committee member raised concern over the coaches currently driving through the school site.  Ms Meloni acknowledged it was not a sensible route and that an accident could happen.
• The necessity and number of lights over the car park was raised.  Ms Meloni stressed that it was necessary for the entrances to be lit for safety but was unable to answer how the number of the lights had been agreed.  The possibility of a timer switch was suggested which Ms Meloni agreed would be a solution.
• Ms Meloni confirmed that the car park would be locked when it was not in use.
• In response to a query on whether the speed limit could be changed; Mr T Higgs, Senior Highways DM Officer, advised that changes to speed limits were normally carried out by the Local Area Forum.
• In response to a member of the committee querying why the decision was made to allow the coaches to turn in both directions when exiting the site, Mr Periam advised that if the community thought it best for the coaches to turn right, a sign could be erected advising all drivers to turn right on leaving the site but the school would have to take charge and police the drivers.  Mr Periam recommended the committee agreed to a condition to a sign advising all vehicles to turn right.  Ms S Winkels, Planning and Enforcement Manager, stated it could also be included in the school travel plan.

The Chairman invited Councillor S Rhodes, Great Missenden Parish Council to read out his statement, appended to the minutes.

Members of the committee raised and discussed the following points:

• A member of the committee, who had attended the site visit, stated she was under the impression the new basketball court would be situated on a piece of land that was currently on a slope with a couple of trees and asked for confirmation that it would not result in the loss of any football pitches.  Mr Periam clarified that the site of the multi-use games area would be on an area which was not currently a usable part of the playing field.  The committee member summarised that it would be an additional resource and there would be no loss of pitches.  Councillor Rhodes then referred to the Sport England report in the agenda pack which made it clear there would be the loss of one natural grass football/hockey pitch which would be replaced by one hard court basketball/netball court and the loss of additional green playing area.  Mr Periam added that the coach drop off area would be on part of the current playing field area; the school marked out the pitches as they saw fit.  Mr Periam reiterated that there would be no loss of sports provision; the multi-use games area would provide alternative sports provision but there would be some loss of playing field space which had not been objected to.  Ms Meloni clarified that the majority of the area to be used was unusable at the moment due to the slope.  The sports provision would be unchanged if the application were approved, even taking into account the fact that  the Misbourne School was currently using one football pitch less than they had been for the last 10 years because they were no longer able to use the pitch that was leased from the parish council.  However, if the school were able to use the rest of the grassed area it would be able to provide the curriculum and extra-curricular activities needed.  There would be no loss of amenity for the football club, AFC Lightning, as they hired the pitch which belonged to the parish council.  Mrs Caprio, District Lawyer and Legal Services Manager, highlighted paragraph 14.2 of the report.
• A member of the committee asked for clarification on the educational need and figures quoted.  Mr Periam stated that Ms Campbell-Balcombe, Commissioner, would be speaking and would respond to this point.

The Chairman invited Ms P Campbell-Balcombe, Commissioner, Buckinghamshire County Council (BCC) to read out her statement, appended to the minutes.

Members of the committee raised and discussed the following points:

• A member of the committee requested assurance from Ms Campbell-Balcombe that there was a local area need and that there was no intention to bus in pupils from the Aylesbury area.  Ms Campbell-Balcombe stated that BCC had to abide by government guidelines and planned by planning area in order to meet the need rather than school catchment area; the whole county was divided into planning areas and within the Misbourne planning area, which was a large area, there was a significant need for additional school places.  The forthcoming change to a unitary authority was irrelevant and Ms Campbell-Balcombe confirmed the data supported the need for the planning application.  BCC had no option but to abide by government projections, which were challenged by the Department for Education.

The Chairman invited the Councillor for the local area, Mr P Martin, to read out his statement.  Mr Martin highlighted the following  points:

• Mr Martin fully supported the school, which he stated was a good school, and the head teacher. The school needed to improve the facilities but he had concerns over the highway aspects e.g. the highways report ignored that there would be a predicted additional 111 two-way vehicle movements per day.  There was a 40 mile per hour speed limit along the boundary of the school where the new access would be created.  Residents had previously asked for the speed limit to be reduced but it had been refused.  Mr Higgs had suggested that an application be made to the Local Area Forum but there would not be any more meetings until the new unitary council was in place.  Mr Martin suggested that the speed limit was reduced before the development work commenced, should the application be approved.
• The existing parking scheme on London Road was dysfunctional; Mr Martin was disappointed that this was not referred to in the report; yet it was proposed to create a new entrance onto the London Road which would exit directly opposite what was currently parking provision.  Mr Martin stated this needed to be changed before work commenced if the application was approved. 
• Coaches should not be allowed to turn left when exiting the site under the new development, in order to protect the already congested High Street.
• Home to school travel was an issue; however, there was a local cycleway, National Cycle Route 57, which the community had been trying to persuade BCC to upgrade as it ran through Angling Spring Wood and would enable pupils from Prestwood to cycle safely to school; this needed to be improved swiftly.
• The pavement along the London Road needed improving.

Members of the committee raised and discussed the following points:

• In response to a member of the committee commenting that there was an urgent need for traffic management at the junction of London Road and the A413; Mr Periam explained that this was outside of the remit of the committee members and could not be dealt with at the meeting.  Mr Higgs added that the applicant had modelled the junction as part of the transport assessment and there would be no impact on additional capacity or cause delay at the junction.
• Mrs Caprio referred to the suggestions that a traffic regulation order to control parking, a reduction in the speed limit and no left turn when exiting the site be put in place before the development commenced, and explained it was not possible for this committee to request these changes as they were executive functions that would be dealt with by the Cabinet Member following a public consultation exercise.   However, if the Committee members wanted to request consideration be given to those matters, a letter could be written, or an informative could be added.   Ms Winkels added that the new accesses were designed for traffic; the main pedestrian access would remain as it was and was in a 30 mph speed limit.  There was a speed limit of 40 mph along London Road but the traffic was travelling at a lower speed and as there was no record of any speed related traffic incidents in the area it did not meet the criteria for a change in the speed limit.  Therefore, as this development was not intensifying the traffic problem or the road safety problem in terms of students, it was not possible to condition or make it a requirement of the application as it was not a contributory factor.  Mr Periam stated that if the Committee was minded that the highways issues were a matter which counted against the application the Committee had the option of considering that as a reason for refusal.
• A member of the committee summarised the following comments/questions raised:

o  Nearby residents were concerned about their loss of the open view and suggested that trees be planted rather than having a view of the coaches.

o  Could lower level lights be installed?

o  Should an informative be made regarding the speed limit in light of the additional traffic if the application were approved and the potential traffic from the works on HS2?

o  BCC should consider a traffic management scheme at the junction.

o  If the application were approved it would mean an improvement to the school and benefit a large number of pupils.

o  There needed to be a clear school travel plan. 

Mr Periam responded to the points as follows:

• There was already a condition requiring a landscaping scheme and the planting of trees was already a condition, and could only be carried out in the application area outlined in red; the area immediately adjoining the properties was not within the application area.  However, it may be possible to plant some trees at the southern end of the proposed coach lay-by to alleviate the impact on the amenity; the detail would need to be submitted pursuant to a condition.

• The County Ecology Officer had requested a condition which was listed in the conditions in the recommendation.  The condition required an ecological management plan to be brought forward and that would include an assessment of the impact of the lighting; this could lead to some changes being made to the detail/level of the lighting.  
• Discussions had been held with the applicant and the normal practice was for high level lighting.   However, if the Committee considered that lower level lighting would be appropriate, Mr Periam suggested a condition be added that the development was not carried out until a detailed lighting scheme had been submitted for approval; the scheme could be brought back to the Committee for consideration if need be.
• There was no reason controls on the use of lighting could not be implemented to limit the lighting. 
• An informative on the highway matters could be included if the Committee were minded to approve the planning permission.  However, Mr Periam stressed that an informative was for advice and was not a condition that could be enforced. 
• Mr Periam also summarised that it had been suggested that the Chairman should write to the relevant Cabinet Member setting out the concerns that had been raised about the speed limit, parking and the need for further consideration over the junction with the A413. 
• The school travel plan was a suggested condition. 

Mrs B Gibbs proposed the committee accepted the recommendation of the officers but conditions should be included for the following:

• A detailed lighting scheme (including consideration being given to lower level or ground lighting), to be submitted for approval prior to commencement of the development.
• The lighting to be controlled by a timer switch.
• Coaches should only turn right when exiting the site.
• The gates must be locked when the car park was not in use.
• A strong informative to be submitted regarding the highway issues.
• The Chairman to write a letter to the appropriate cabinet member regarding the parking issues on the boundary road, the 40 mph speed limit and to check the state of the footways outside the school and request an upgrade to Cycle Route 57.

The proposal was seconded by Mr N Brown.

Mrs Caprio clarified that the Committee was being asked to indicate support for the application subject to the conditions in Appendix A of the addendum and the informative.  The application would need to be referred to the Secretary of State of State in case he wanted to intervene.  Mrs Caprio listed the conditions mentioned above and reminded the committee that the point regarding the provision of a landscaping scheme, to include screening to the residential properties to the south of the application area, be added to the list of conditions.  The members of the committee unanimously approved the recommendation.

RESOLVED:  The Development Control Committee INDICATED SUPPORT for application no. CC/0043/19 for the proposed demolition of the existing outdated Sports Hall and construction of a playing area in its place; construction of a new two-storey Sports Hall adjacent to the south of the new playing area; construction of a new five classroom single storey Teaching Block; extension to Multi-Use Games Area; and new Coach Access and Car and Coach Park and drop-off zone at The Misbourne School, Misbourne Drive, Great Missenden, Buckinghamshire.

RESOLVED that the application be forwarded to the Secretary of State in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Consultation) (England) Direction 2009.

RESOLVED: That in the event of the Secretary of State not intervening, the Planning Manager be authorised to APPROVE application no. CC/0043/19 for the proposed demolition of the existing outdated Sports Hall and construction of a playing area in its place;  construction of a new two-storey Sports Hall adjacent to the south of the new playing area; construction  of a new five classroom single storey Teaching Block; extension to Multi-Use Games Area; and new Coach Access and  Car and Coach Park and drop-off zone at The Misbourne School, Misbourne Drive, Great Missenden, Buckinghamshire, subject to the amended conditions and informative set out in Appendix A of the Addendum (including that the gates to the coach and car parks be locked when not in use, the lights be controlled with a time switch and to the provision of the landscaping scheme to include screening to the residential properties to the south of the application area) to the report and the following conditions/informative agreed at the Committee meeting:

• A detailed lighting scheme (including consideration being given to lower level, or ground lighting, to be submitted for approval prior to commencement of the development.
• Coaches should only turn right when exiting the site.
• A strong informative to be attached regarding the highway issues.

• The Chairman to write a letter to the appropriate cabinet member regarding the parking issues on the boundary road, the 40 mph speed limit and to check the state of the footways outside the school and request an upgrade to cycle route 57.