Agenda item

This application seeks to vary condition 3 of planning permission 05/00983/FULM for the erection of a lightweight temporary indoor sports hall, permanent all-weather football pitch and single-storey extension to an equipment store within the University of York's Heslington West Campus.  The consent was granted in 2005.  Condition 3 requires the temporary indoor sports hall to be removed after five years, i.e. by 14 July 2010.  The current application seeks to extend the time limit for removal by a further ten years, i.e. to 14 July 2020. [Heslington] [Site Visit]

Members considered an application to seek to vary condition 3 of planning permission 05/00983/FULM to extend the time limit for removal of the temporary sports hall until 14 July 2020.

The following additional written representation was tabled:

• Statement from Councillor Aspden and Councillor Jamieson-Ball requesting that the Committee considered all options in respect of the application, including agreeing to the facility for a further five years whilst the university looked at any future permanent options.
• Letter from the Executive Headteacher of Fulford School detailing the school’s use of the university’s sports facilities.

Officers gave an update on the application.  The applicant had submitted a letter from the headteacher of Fulford School supporting the application and stating that the school relied heavily on the hall for their PE needs and was concerned that if the sports hall were removed the school would have no alternative facility. 

Officers also gave details of representation in support of the application that had been received from a member of the public. It argued that whilst the hall is not a thing of beauty it was not out of place in its surroundings and was of enormous benefit to both the university students and to people unconnected with the university, including local schools and sports clubs.

Formal comments had also been received from Lifelong Learning and Leisure.  They had stated that the city currently had a shortage of indoor sports hall space. Whilst the council had plans to tackle this shortfall the existing tent was a welcome temporary addition to the city's facilities.  But it was not a proper indoor sports hall, it did not have air conditioning or heating of any kind. Nor did it have a sprung floor. However the tent did provide covered space for 5 a side football and other team games that would otherwise be played outdoors. Much of this use could be relocated to the new "sports village" on Heslington East by 2012.  Lifelong Learning and Leisure would be happy to see the tent continue to exist but granting a temporary approval for 2, 5 or 10 years would not address the long-term provision of sporting opportunities. If Members were minded to approve this application Lifelong Learning and Leisure would request that it be conditional upon the university agreeing that within the next 2 years it would develop a time-tabled scheme for the delivery of the indoor sports hall space required at Heslington East.

Members queried whether they could determine the time limit for removal.  Officers clarified that the application was for a further ten years, i.e. to 14 July 2020 and should be considered as such.  If, during the proceedings, the applicant indicated that a shorter time limit would be accepted, Members could take this into account.

A resident spoke in support of the application and tabled a list of 113 names of residents who had joined a Facebook campaign to keep the sports hall in operation.  He stated that the local community should not be made to suffer and suggested that if approval was given for a further five-year period, this would provide the university with sufficient time to make alternative arrangements.

The applicant’s agent spoke in support of the application.  He stated that the sports hall was very well used by the university, local school children and the community.  The university’s capital programme had just been agreed.  Under a partnership arrangement the university would contribute £5m towards the sports village.  The university recognised the need to replace the sports hall but it was a matter of priorities.  A balance had to be struck between its appearance and the need to provide facilities for the wider community. Funding was not currently available without jeopardising other schemes such as the swimming pool. He requested that the time limit for removal be extended for a further ten years.  In response to a question from a Member he confirmed that a five-year period would be preferable to refusal.

Councillor Alexander spoke in support of the application.  He stated that there were insufficient sports facilities and that although there was a need for a replacement facility, the local community would suffer if approval was not extended.

Councillor Pierce spoke in support of the time limit for removal being extended.  He commented on the need for the facility and stated that the appearance of the sports hall was not out of context and that landscaping could be carried out.

Officers were asked if the university could be required to submit plans for alternative sports provision within a specified period.  They advised that this would not be enforceable but that an alternative would be to limit the period of approval with the agreement of the applicant.

The applicant stated that the university’s commitment to sport and recreation was evidenced by the £5m investment in the sports village.  The university would be pleased to accept a five-year extension rather than refusal but funding commitments for the next four years had already been made.  The facility was well used and the university was willing to take remedial measures, including some screening, if necessary.

Members expressed serious concerns that the university had not put plans in place to replace the sports centre with a permanent structure and had already agreed a capital programme for the next four years. These concerns had to be balanced against the fact that the facilities were well used by school children and the local community.  It was suggested that a six-year period would provide the university with an opportunity to put forward plans for a permanent structure, taking into account the fact that its capital programme for the next four years was already in place.  Members stated that they would expect the university to discuss with the council any proposals for a replacement sports hall before the expiry of the temporary consent.  A condition in respect of landscaping should also be put in place.

Councillor Moore moved and Councillor Wiseman seconded a motion to approve the application for a six-year period and subject to a condition being included in respect of landscaping.

RESOLVED:That the application be approved subject to the following conditions:

1.The temporary indoor sports hall building shall be removed by 14 July 2016 and the land reinstated to its former condition.

Reason:The temporary nature of the building is such that it is considered inappropriate on a permanent basis.

2.The existing areas within the site for parking and manoeuvring of vehicles (and cycles) shall be retained solely for such purposes.

Reason:In the interests of highway safety.

3.All lighting shall be positioned and angled to prevent glare, reflection or distraction to highway users.

Reason:In the interests of road safety.

4.The height of the floodlights hereby approved shall not exceed 14m from approved ground levels.

Reason:In the interests of visual amenity.

5.The rate of discharge into the watercourse shall not exceed 1.4 litres per second.

Reason:To ensure the development is acceptable in drainage terms.

6.  Within three months of the date of this permission detailed proposals for the landscaping/screening of the temporary sports hall shall be submitted to the local planning authority and approved in writing.  The scheme, which shall show the number, species, height and position of trees and shrubs shall be implemented within 6 months of the date of this permission.  Any trees or plants which, within a period of five years from the date of this planning permission die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased, shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species, unless alternatives are agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason:To minimize the visual impact of the proposals on the surrounding area.

REASON:It is considered that the temporary sports hall, by virtue of its impact on the character and visual amenity of the surrounding area, its utilitarian design and deteriorating visual appearance is unsuitable for retention at the site beyond the temporary permission granted.