Agenda item

Application for determination:

Installation of a play park and new footpath on an existing green space area at Tuffley Park.

The Principal Planning Officer presented the report which detailed an application for the installation of a play park and new footpath on an existing green space area at Tuffley Park.

She advised that the application had been submitted by the Podsmead Big Local group and would be funded from National lottery funding received by the group in 2012.

She advised members that there would be no nett loss of sports pitches and the plans indicated buffer distance of 30 metres from the boundaries of the nearest residential properties. This distance exceeded both local and national guidance which suggested a distance of 20 metres.

She noted that the location had been chosen as it would be overlooked by the nearby properties. She referred to the late material which contained two further representations and amended condition 2 and 3.

Councillor Deborah Smith, Ward Member for Podsmead, was invited to address the Committee.

Councillor Smith supported the application and advised that the initiative was started by a petition form the residents of Oaklands Park. She stated that Podsmead Big Local recognised that the scheme would make a positive difference to the area. She believed that it promoted the aims of the Gloucestershire Health and well Being Strategy as it would encourage family use and would provide equipment for users with a wide range of abilities.

She noted that there had been no objections from Sport England or the Highways Authority and the buffer distances exceeded local and national guidance.

She was not ignoring the concerns of local residents and would work with them to address any issues should they arise.

Nicola Tunbridge of 3 Podsmead Place addressed the Committee in opposition to the application.

Ms Tunbridge stated that a request for a meeting following receipt of the initial letter from Big Local had been refused by Penny Ryder. She had subsequently attended an open meeting where the concerns and fears of local residents had not been addressed and she questioned who were the 85 per cent of residents who had been said to be in favour of the scheme.

She believed that some residents would feel forced to move due to the loss of privacy, particularly for 2,3 and 4 Podsmead Place and the unwelcome proximity of lots of noisy children. She believed that the proposal would affect the character of the area and the proposed equipment, which included a zip wire, would be an eyesore on the green space.

She believed that the proposal would encourage anti-social behaviour and litter and when a proposal had been discussed with Councillor Watkins in the past residents had been assured that the play area would be sited on the raised area to the right of the clubhouse. She considered that properties would be blighted and there would be parking problems in the surrounding streets.

She expressed concerns regarding the safety of children due to the proximity of the football pitch and the potential for them to be struck by footballs.

She stated that the park was currently used for many types of sport and by dog walkers and noted that many of the local residents were older people.

Councillor Dee noted that as soon as play areas had been installed they tended to be taken over by older youths and he called for the proposal to be re-examined.

Councillor Morgan noted that when such areas were designed for a wide age range they tended to create their own particular problems. He stated that he would not be comfortable with a similar proposal close to his home and suggested that a separate area be created for older children He believed that an alternative location should be considered.

The Vice-Chair noted that a play area could not be located near a cricket pitch and that proposed seemed to be the most suitable. He believed that the area near the clubhouse was not suitable and separate play areas were not practicable.

Councillor Fearn welcomed the proposal as a positive initiative that would benefit a lot of families. She welcomed the provision of accessible equipment.

Councillor Hanman questioned the 85 per cent said to be in favour and asked if the Committee were to ignore the 32 letters of objection.

The Principal Planning Officer believed that the 85 per cent referred to the community group consultation which was not part of the planning proposal. She advised that the closest neighbours had been notified of the application by the Council.

Councillor Toleman noted that there was great demand for play areas and he had not received a single complaint about the three play areas in Hempsted.

Councillor Morgan moved deferral but the motion was not seconded.

The Chair proposed that the application be approved subject to the amendments in the late material. The motion was seconded by the Vic-Chair.

RESOLVED that consent be granted subject to the conditions in the report with the following amendments:-

Condition 2

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Site Location Plan and Fence Detail Plan received by the Local Planning Authority on 7^th June 2017 and Layout Plan drawing no. V3 received on 31^st August 2017 except where otherwise required by conditions of this permission.

Reason

To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans and in accordance with policies contained within Second Deposit City of Gloucester Local Plan (2002).

Condition 3

The Play Area shall not be open to the public until the litter bins and facilities for cycle parking have been provided in accordance with details submitted and shown on the approved Layout Plan V3 received by the Local Planning Authority on 31^st August 2017.

Reason

In the interests of amenity in accordance with Policy BE.4 of the Second Deposit City of Gloucester Local Plan and to ensure that adequate cycle parking is provided, to promote cycle use and to ensure that the opportunities for sustainable transport modes have been taken up in accordance with paragraph 32 of the National Planning Policy Framework