Planning for success

An expert in strategic planning for education facilities, Philip Scott unravels the fundamental role town planning has in successful education development projects.

While education is one of a small number of departmental budgets which have been protected from the £20 billion capital spend savings the UK government is hoping to make between now and 2019, attention is starting to focus on how the education system as a whole can be made more efficient.

A recent government paper, Fixing the foundation: creating a more prosperous nation, sets out how a more efficient education system will be critical in driving a more prosperous, productive and dynamic economy. The report highlights improved education environments as having a central role to play.

However, improving educational sites is not always straightforward. While it’s true that improvement projects are, on the whole, less contentious than land disposals (even when the land being sold off is genuinely surplus to requirements) there are some pitfalls to be avoided.

While education has been protected from the capital spend savings in the UK, attention is starting to focus on how the education system as a whole can be made more efficient.

No planning? No project

Most important for project managers and senior sponsors is to include town planning considerations in the project plan, in addition to education regulations and guidelines.

It’s a crucial point. During the past year alone, while advising on two relatively modest education projects we have been reminded of the critical role that town planning expertise plays in helping school site development proposals through the application process smoothly.

In both cases there had been a proper and well considered School Development Plan which supported the base case to redevelop land to deliver enhanced education facilities. Both proposals had been carefully worked up by architects in accordance with Building Bulletin guidelines.

Yet in both instances seemingly well founded development proposals had met with significant challenges — major hurdles, in fact — through the statutory town planning process. This happened purely because the project team had focused on complying with education related criteria and assessment, rather than with town planning policies.

Complex, challenging — but essential

In fairness, the consent processes for new developments affecting education institutions are among the most complex and challenging set of rules facing Local Education Authorities (LEAs), diocese and building professionals. It’s no wonder that project managers focus on the Department for Education (DfE) processes and all too often take their eyes off the ball as regards to town planning.

Nevertheless, the importance and the significant impacts of the Town and Country Planning Act and the need, potentially, to secure formal planning permission from the Local Planning Authority (LPA) must be taken into account — both of which are in addition to the consents and approvals required from the LEA.

Engage early

Critically this will often require opening up the proposals to consultation with the wider public and other (non-education) stakeholders. Key issues of importance for neighbours, local communities and stakeholders in the statutory planning process tend not to be focused on education-based premises criteria and area guidelines, but instead focus on amenity based impacts. These include increased traffic, noise, visual impact, and loss of playing fields or open land.

To ensure success, project teams need to engage with local stakeholders at an early stage. Pre-application submission advice from planning officers at the relevant LPA will be essential. Pre-application engagement with local neighbours, ward councillors and community groups will also help to explain the merits of schemes, discuss proposals and address issues up-front.

This is especially important when development proposals affect outdoor space or playing field land, because such factors have the potential to become strategically sensitive and politically contentious.

Thinking through the town planning implications of an education project can make a real difference.

The not-so-great outdoors

In addition, there is another layer of complexity for projects of this type, and that is around what different regulatory authorities define as ‘school playing fields’.

The DfE guidance (Section 77 of the School Standards and Frameworks Act 1998) considers that certain forms of soft landscaped areas or marginal land may not constitute ‘school playing fields’ for the purposes of justifying the formal disposal of such land through the DfE.

This seems pretty simple and sensible, especially if a school is redeveloping relatively modest amounts of outdoor play space to cater for increased students, meet specific curriculum requirements or to rejuvenate outdated premises.

However, if formal planning permission is required for a proposal involving outdoor play space, applicants must be aware that Sport England may well be a statutory consultee, even if that outdoor space is small or hasn’t been used for a while.

It’s all about potential

The reason? Sport England is a statutory consultee in any planning application involving playing field land, land last used as playing field land, or land capable of recreational use. This latter category could include any grass area that could, potentially, be improved to form part of playing field land.

Just because such areas are not used for team game activities, do not comprise flat spaces or are not marked-up for team games, does not mean to say that Sport England will not regard such areas of land as being capable of providing sports use and require justification for their loss in accordance with Sport England policy.

Sport England considers playing fields and, crucially, land capable of such use to be one of the most important resources for sport and leisure activities in England. Its starting position in consultations is to oppose such development in all but exceptional cases, regardless of whether the land is in public, private or educational use (see Sport England exception criteria below).

Tread carefully

The key lesson here is to proceed with utmost caution and seek specialist planning advice as early as you can in the design process. Planning applications involving such land will require technical advice and supporting evidence, even if the proposed use is for education buildings and premises.

A final pointer is that, when it comes to gaining consent, one departmental Secretary of State is perfectly entitled to take a different view than another. So while decision makers in the LEA or DfE may grant consent for a proposed education development, the LPA and Secretary of State for the Department of Communities and Local Government (planning) are perfectly entitled to take a different view and refuse permission.

Planning decisions are not always easy to second guess. Meticulous preparation is essential. In particular, thinking through the town planning implications of an education project can make a real difference, to the speed and smoothness of the determination process — and ultimately to the success of the whole project.

Sport England consider playing fields and, crucially, land capable of such use to be one of the most important resources for sport and leisure activities in England.

Sport England exception criteria

Sport England will oppose developments on school land that is currently used or has been used as a playing field, or is capable of recreational use, unless:

• A carefully qualified assessment of current and future playing fields needs demonstrates that there is an excess of playing field provision in the catchment area.
• The proposed development is ancillary to the principal use of the site as a playing field and does not affect the quantity or quality of pitches or adversely affect their use.
• The proposal only affects land incapable of forming part of a playing field or results in the inability to make use of any playing field.
• The playing field which would be lost is replaced by a playing field of equivalent or better quality and quantity in a suitable location, prior to the commencement of the development.
• The proposed development is itself for a sports facility which could outweigh the detriment caused by the playing field loss.