Planning Schedule Date: 10/08/2004 - Stroud District Council
Planning Schedule Date: 10/08/2004 - Stroud District Council
Planning Schedule Date: 10/08/2004 - Stroud District Council
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
<strong>Planning</strong> <strong>Schedule</strong> <strong>Date</strong>: <strong>10</strong>/<strong>08</strong>/<strong>2004</strong><br />
had the opportunity to comment and become involved in the planning application and project in<br />
general.<br />
In overall terms, the <strong>Council</strong> is satisfied from a sport and leisure perspective with the level of<br />
outdoor playing space which is being provided. The additional pitch at King George V site (KGV),<br />
the upgraded pitch at Nailsworth School/Recreation Centre and the proposed Multi Use Games<br />
Area/Astro Turf which will be subject to a separate application, all considerably improve the<br />
quantity and quality of community facilities for the town. Attention is drawn to several items which<br />
should form part of the planning conditions attached to any permission.<br />
1.The order of the work should include the construction of the school playing pitch prior to the<br />
new stadium being built in line with the recommendations of Sport England.<br />
2.A new 'community use agreement' should be entered into which formalises the partnership<br />
between the FGR, the <strong>District</strong> and Town <strong>Council</strong>s and Nailsworth School. This agreement will<br />
guide the operational management of the facilities at the school site in particular but will also<br />
encourage partnership working across the community use and development of other sites like<br />
FGR and KGV.<br />
3.A financial commitment is made by the FGR to the establish a new playing pitch at KGV and<br />
future arrangements are agreed for its maintenance. This work should be undertaken prior to the<br />
commencement of the residential development at the Lawn site which conforms to Sport<br />
England's recommendation.<br />
CONCLUSIONS<br />
As with most planning applications a balance has to be struck between the benefits of the<br />
proposals and any disbenefits. Whilst it is accepted that the development will impact on several<br />
households its benefits are considered to outweigh such impacts which are not in themselves of<br />
a magnitude which would warrant the refusal of planning permission for the reasons outlined in<br />
the main body of this report.<br />
Therefore, in the public interest, the development is deemed to represent a proposal which would<br />
have a wide community benefit and enhance both the living conditions for the majority, the<br />
enjoyment of sporting facilities, provide valuable housing provision on the existing club site after<br />
the relocation of the facilities and retain and enhance facilities currently provided in this locality by<br />
the Football Club. The site will have a greater degree of accessibility in many forms and will<br />
provide a significant amount of on site car parking thereby relieving the local road network of<br />
parked cars during match times. An informal arrangement for parking cars at the site when it is<br />
not in use will allow car parking in the town centre to be utilized and bring economic benefits for<br />
the town centre.<br />
The traffic generation will not be significantly different from the existing situation and after<br />
confirmation there are no technical issues outstanding this is not an issue in terms of the stadium<br />
proposals.<br />
The interests of wildlife have been considered and it has been confirmed the methods of<br />
mitigation are suitable.<br />
The impact of the development has been considered in landscape terms and whilst short distant<br />
views will be altered long distance views will be such that the affect on the Cotswold Area of<br />
Outstanding Natural Beauty will of a scale which is not detrimental. The application is a matter<br />
the Countryside Agency has not objected to in terms of impact on the near by designated area.<br />
RECOMMENDATION<br />
81