Agenda item

Members considered the following planning application report:-

Oral representations were received from Mr Gary Hillman, Chairman of Cray Wanderers Football Club.  Mr Hillman submitted the following points in support of the application:-

·  This was a unique site and a unique opportunity for Bromley.

·  There was no possibility of the development encroaching onto Green Belt land as the site was landlocked.

·  Public pathways would be improved and new public transport links would be introduced to the area.

·  An Environmental Impact Assessment had been completed.

·  Unique very special circumstances existed for developing the land.

·  The Club’s current lease would expire in 2014 at which point an alternative site would need to be sought.

·   St Paul’s Cray needed regenerating and the development would benefit the area.

·  1,100 letters in support of the application had been submitted.

·  Many applications to develop Green Belt land had been approved for sporting purposes.

·  The application was in outline form only so there was room for manoeuvre with regard to social housing, car parking etc.

In response to questions from Members, Mr Hillman reported that discussions had taken place with Transport for London to introduce a bus route into the area, however the financial aspect of this had not been raised.  Transport links would be essential to accommodate hotel patrons, employees, residents and users of the leisure facilities.  A total of 14 alternative locations had been looked at however, the application site was well situated next to the A20 motorway and within walking distance for local people.

Oral representations were also received from Ward Member Councillor Peter Fortune who, before submitting his comments, thanked Mr Hillman and Cray Wanderers Football Club for the great work they carried out within the community.

Councillor Fortune made the following comments:-

·  The proposed application had been debated for some time and residents had been consulted on the issue.

·  Whilst it would be beneficial for the Club to move back to the area, the proposal was for development of Green Belt land which should be protected.

·  A total of 2,500 leaflets had been delivered to local residents with a response rate of 3%.  Over 90% of the responses were in objection to the application.

·  Local residents took great pride in the community however, St Paul’s Cray had a fragile infrastructure and local people sought projects of regeneration not obliteration.

·  Rural identity was important and needed to be protected.

The Chief Planner informed Members that a letter of support had been received from the applicant’s agents.  The letter contained responses to the objections which the current application raised and attempted to demonstrate how the proposal would overcome outstanding issues on each of the recommended reasons for refusal.

The Chief Planner also reported that a further 210 objections had been received since publication of the report including three via Ward Member Councillor Peter Fortune.  Old St Paul's Cray Village Residents Society objected on the grounds that the development was inappropriate, Jones Lang LaSalle on behalf of Crayfields Business Park was not persuaded that very special circumstances had been proven, Bromley Education Business Partnership did not express an opinion other than to note that Cray Wanderers had provided valuable work experience in the community and Environment and Highways commented that if the application were to be approved, problems resulting from noise, traffic fumes, lights and general disturbance would change the character of the area.  Following receipt of an acknowledgement from the Council, 6 people had contacted the planning section to withdraw their objections. 

Sport England supported the development purely on the sporting aspect of the application.

Councillor Ince paid tribute to the Club for the work they had undertaken within the community.  He made the following comments:-

·  Whilst wishing to see the Club return to the Crays, he could not support the application.  The very special circumstances put forward by the applicant were not convincing and the proposed site was situated on a large piece of Green Belt land.

·  This particular site had been selected because of the additional space available on which to develop a housing scheme.

·  The Planning Policy Framework indicated the need to keep land open and to prevent neighbouring towns encroaching upon one another.

·  The proposed site appears scrub-like and unattractive however Ruxley Lakes and beyond was a very important ecological site and nature zone and a fragile area of biodiversity.

·  There were clear differences between the regeneration of Dartford and that of Cray Village.

·  Although the development could bring a boost to the local economy, it would be minimal and unquantifiable.

·  The proposed housing scheme appears cramped and there would be a lack of doctors’ surgeries and education options within the area to support new residents.

·  The site was located in a low PTAL area so most journeys would be undertaken by car.  The surrounding roads were country lanes and not built to carry so much traffic.

·  Brighton and Hove Albion Football Club was developed on protected land but was tucked away off the A27.  By comparison, the proposed site for Cray Wanderers was located alongside a country lane.

·  Whilst Kent County Cricket Club was permitted to erect 45 houses on Metropolitan Open Land, the location itself was an infil site rather than an open area.

Councillor Fawthrop was concerned that the proposed floodlighting would have an impact on the site of scientific interest.  The land also acted as a buffer which, if opened up, could become an area for fly tipping etc.

Councillor Mrs Manning stated that the development would be surrounded by Green Belt land and the occupiers of the housing scheme would be terribly isolated with no possibility of transport being brought to the site.  The development was therefore totally inappropriate and Councillor Mrs Manning supported refusal.

Councillor Michael commented that although promoted for sports purposes, in reality the application was for a commercial development comprising a sporting element.  No very special circumstances had been proven and a dangerous precedent would be set if the application was to be granted permission.

Councillor Fookes agreed with the recommendation to refuse the application but proposed that the Executive assist the Club in finding a suitable alternative site.

Following a unanimous vote, Members RESOLVED that PERMISSION BE REFUSED as recommended, for the reasons set out in the report of the Chief Planner.