Decision details

Decision details

Aristotle Lane Footbridge, Aristotle Lane: 14/01348/FUL

Decision status: Recommendations approved

Is Key decision?: No

Is subject to call in?: No

Decisions:

The Head of City Development submitted a report (previously circulated now appended) which detailed an application for planning permission fordemolition of the existing footbridge and erection of a replacement footbridge with ramped approaches and new stepped access. Provision of 12 car parking spaces and change of use of part of land adjacent to railway lines for educational purposes as part of SS Phillip and James School.

 

Tim King spoke against the application; he raised a number of landscaping issues.

 

John Griffin (SS Philip & James School), Colin Field and Paul Brakefield (Network Rail) spoke in favour of the application.

 

The Committee discussed the issue of landscaping and retaining the trees to mask the visibility of the bridge, the noise from the trains and to maintain the rural landscape of the area. Officers advised these concerns could be managed through the currently proposed conditions:

Condition 3 – to include safeguarding the wiggly path leading to the West ramp

Condition 6 – to include construction access to the meadow

Condition 11 – to include native trees replanting and tree retention where possible

Condition 15 – work done by qualified arboriculturalist

 

The Committee resolved to GRANT planning permission subject to the following conditions and informative:

 

Conditions

1          Development begun within time limit      

2          Develop in accordance with approved plans    

3          Boundary and abutment details, including spur ramp, handrails, boundary walls and bridge parapet details         

4          Flood plain storage

5          Contamination and remediation  

6          Demolition and Construction Travel Plan          

7          Sustainable drainage        

8          Tree protection        

9          Landscape plan required  

10        Landscape carry out after completion     

11        Landscape management plan

12        Hard surface design.

13        Underground services

14        Tree protection plan

15        Arboricultural method statement

16        Samples of materials          

17        Sample panels        

18.       Biodiversity

19        Archaeology

20.       Materials- perforated panelling on railway bridge.

 

Informative

Seek to replace any trees removed due to development as close as possible to the site.

 

Report author: Nick Worlledge

Publication date: 17/11/2015

Date of decision: 29/04/2015

Decided at meeting: 29/04/2015 - Planning Review Committee

Accompanying Documents: