Installation of 3m high mesh fencing, 6no. 15m high floodlighting columns, 3no. portacabins, 2no. spectator stands, kiosk and dugouts, provision of additional parking facilities and emergency access; and environmental improvements to provide replacement habitat.
Minutes:
Councillor Lee Mason, who was late to the meeting and Councillors Gerald Vernon-Jackson, Sandra Stockdale and David Fuller were in attendance for the remainder of the meeting.
The City Development Manager introduced the report and reported in the supplementary matters list that an objection had been received on behalf of Tudor Sailing Club in respect of : a) safety due to additional traffic on the adjoining access roads: b) Insufficient parking facilities with the potential for users parking within spaces allocated to the sailing club. Whilst the representation from the sailing club refers to "their" access road, it is noted that the access road is owned by the City Council and is intended to serve all of the facilities within the area including the sports pitches, the Portsmouth Outdoor Centre and the Sailing Club. As mentioned within the committee report it is considered that the proposal will not have a significant adverse impact on the surrounding highway network. The Sailing Club incorporate signage within their parking areas to deter non-members from using them.
The Contaminated Land Team (CLT) commented that the site on which the development works are proposed is part of the Great Salterns Estate - marshy land raised by refuse disposal in 20th century up to 1960. A site investigation report is held by the CLT for land to the north of the proposed development which identified elevated concentrations of certain heavy metals within the top metre of made ground present. As such the potential for similar contamination to be present on this site cannot be discounted. Therefore, conditions relating to land contamination are requested.
The Langstone Harbour Board commented that although they raise objection, they do have strong concerns in respect of the potential loss of more than a football pitch sized area of supporting feeding habitat for Brent Geese. On that basis, support is expressed for the condition proposed by Natural England (NE) relating to the monitoring of bird behaviour during the winter following the erection of the fence. A condition relating to the impact of the floodlighting is also suggested to ensure that they would have no adverse effect on navigation within the Harbour.
The Hampshire and Isle of Wight Wildlife Trust commented that the Trust is generally satisfied with the level of ecological survey work that has been carried out at the site in relation to this application, and the conclusions that have been drawn from that survey work. The mitigation proposals with regard to impacts on the designated sites would appear to be appropriate and deliverable and the Wildlife Trust welcomes the inclusion of the conditions recommended by NE. However, concerns are raised in respect of the effectiveness of the Brent Goose refuge area given its proximity to the coastal path and the potential impact of future coastal defence works.
It should be noted that NE has suggested the inclusion of three conditions. Whilst two relating to the timings of works and the provision of the enhancement (Brent Goose Refuge) area have been included within the recommendation, a third relating to monitoring and future changes to the southern boundary have been omitted. It is considered that such a condition would not meet the six tests (necessary, relevant to planning and to the development to be permitted, enforceable, precise, and reasonable in all other respects) as set out within the NPPF and the NPPG.
The City Development Manager reported that all of the additions and alterations proposed within the application are required to meet football league entry requirements. Based on the Extended Phase 1 Ecological Survey and Phase 2 Brent Goose Survey Report (HCCET, August 2014), with the additional ecologically-relevant information in the Design and Access Statement, the City Council's ecologist has concluded that the proposal will not reduce the functioning of the site for Brent Geese and will not result in any direct or indirect impacts to the designated sites themselves. On that basis it would be unreasonable for the LPA to expect the football club to make significant investments in the facilities (with the aid of grants from public bodies) when a condition requiring the removal of the southern boundary after a year would conflict with the requirements for league entry rendering any permission meaningless. Therefore such a condition cannot be considered to be 'reasonable in all other respects'.
In respect of the coastal defence works, Phase 1 which would terminate to the north of Kendall's Quay is due to commence in 2015 (subject to planning). These works are unlikely to have an in-combination impact on the Brent Goose habitat. Future phases immediately to the east of the proposed Brent Goose refuge, planned to commence in 2018, will need to consider any potential impact on the adjoining Brent Goose habitat and is not considered to be a concern for the current application.
The City Development Manager reported that further discussions with Natural England need to take place with the council's ecologist and therefore was recommending a change to the recommendation in that delegated authority be granted to grant conditional planning permission, subject to further discussions with NE.
Deputations were heard from Councillors Lynne Stagg and Darren Sanders, both in support of the application, and the following points were included in their representations. Yvonne Fradgley-Smith and Blu Boan, from Baffins Milton Rovers Football Club (the applicants) were in attendance should members require clarification on any matters but had declined to speak.
· The club have been promoted to a step 6 Club in the Sydenhams Football League.
· This promotion is good for any club but for the club to progress they need to upgrade their pitch and facilities.
· Gravel traps along the pathways and roads will mean water will drain away.
· Some trees may need pruning as a result of the fencing but these will be replaced as will the bushes.
· It will cause little or no light pollution.
· There is currently fencing on 3 sides so only one additional side.
· Need fencing to protect the site from vandalism particularly due to the cost of the floodlights and cabins.
· Should be using this club to inspire other young people. Teenagers need to have something to aspire to.
· There is a real issue around the clubs promotion which needs to be sorted.
· This facility gets teenagers off of the streets and playing sport.
· This is the council's access road and not the Tudor Sailing Club.
· Langstone Harbour Board have raised concern not objection.
· It is unreasonable to remove one fence. The site needs the full protection.
Member's questions
Member sought clarification on the effect of the floodlighting in terms of navigation and the possible impact on the Brent Goose.
Members' comments
Members were in full support of this application and felt that the fencing around the pitch area would not interfere but provide some added protection to the Brent Goose.
RESOLVED that delegated authority be granted to the City Development Manager to grant conditional planning permission subject to further discussions with Natural England.