APPENDIX B F
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL AND REGULATORY BOARD
18 TH MARCH 2010
REPORT OF THE COUNTY SOLICITOR
APPLICATION UNDER REGULATION 3 OF THE TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING GENERAL REGULATIONS
PART A – SUMMARY REPORT
APPLICATION NO. & DATE: 2010/0029/03 – 7th January 2010 (LCC Ref No 2010/L173/03)
PROPOSAL: Erection of demountable timber classroom, South Kilworth Church of England Primary School
LOCATION: Walcote Road, South Kilworth (Harborough District)
APPLICANT: Leicestershire County Council
MAIN ISSUES: Design and materials of construction, energy efficiency, highway safety and parking provision, impacts on the locality, potential for increase in pupil numbers, and any overriding need.
RECOMMENDATION: REFUSE, for reason of design and materials, potential for growth and over-development, and consequent unsustainable travel patterns, contrary to national guidance and relevant policies of the Local Plan.
Circulation Under Sensitive Issues Procedures
Mr. G. A. Hart CC
Officer to Contact
Mr. Chris Noakes Tel: 0116 305 7053 E-Mail [email protected] 2 2010/0029/03 (2010/L173/03) - continued
PART B – MAIN REPORT
Background
1. South Kilworth C of E Primary School is situated on the north-west edge of the village, on the north side of Walcote Road, where this lane leads out of the village through open countryside. The original school house dates from 1851 and occupies an attractive ‘period’ structure with distinctive features such as feature brickwork (albeit not listed). Various extensions and alterations have been added over the years including classroom/hall extensions, new cloakrooms and toilets in recent years (see below). The school serves the local village and the surrounding rural catchment area in the south of the County.
2. Currently there are 69 pupils at the school aged between 4-10 years of age, and numbers of pupil within the catchment area are expected to remain constant over the next 5 years between 65-70 pupils. These are accommodated in the main school buildings in two main groups; Key Stage 1 pupils (i.e. inclusive of the 4+ foundation year, as well as 5+ and 6+ pupils) occupy 33 sq m of linked teaching space in the northern block; whilst Key Stage 2 pupils (i.e. 8+, 9+ and 10+) use some 34 sq. m. of teaching space in the larger southern building.
3. In addition, the school includes IT suite, toilets and cloaks, staff and offices (at first floor level of the school house) and a large area dedicated to library room. It is understood that present staffing levels include the Headteacher, 2 full-time teachers, 3 ancillary teaching staff, secretary, and incidental dinner and cleaning staff. Some 7 staff members are on site during the average teaching day.
4. At present the school has an ‘official’ capacity for up to 70 pupils (i.e. entry PAL of 10 pupils x 7 year groups). This capacity was increased from 50 pupils (i.e. entry PAL of 7 pupils x 7 years) in 2005/06, as a result of significant extensions carried out then (see below), also provided to accommodate additional pupil nos on site, over and above the designated capacity of the School at the time.
5. Over the last year or so, the Head has been in discussion with officers of Children and Young People's Service (CYPS) Department regarding the provision of additional accommodation at the School, to provide supplementary teaching area for separate Foundation Year (4+) base. In the context of the existing facilities and floorspace on site, the School has been advised that it does not have a ‘basic’ need for such development and it could not be funded by the Education Authority. Subsequently there was discussion about a small ‘withdrawal’ space for individual/small group teaching and extra curriculum activities such a music lessons.
6. In the event, the School has decided to progress with a ‘self-funded’ project from devolved budget to fund a free standing, self-contained Foundation Year base, to meet the demands of the curriculum for these youngest pupils. This would enable the 4+ pupils to be taught separately from the Year 1 base (currently 34 pupils), and serve the anticipated 10 pupils joining the Foundation Year in Autumn 2010.
DC®. BOARD 18/03/2010 3 2010/0029/03 (2010/L173/03) - continued
DC®. BOARD 18/03/2010 4 2010/0029/03 (2010/L173/03) - continued
7. The school has indicated that there is no intention to increase the overall number of pupils above the existing 70 limit in the ‘planned admissions number’ (PAN). However, the proposed teaching base will generate an additional 31 places that could be used for general teaching and as a consequence generate surplus places either at South Kilworth or at surrounding schools. The forecast for September 2010 is 68 pupils this additional accommodation could therefore generate surplus places of 33%. The Local Authority is expected by Central Government to reduce surplus places.
History of Proposals
8. There have been a number of individual proposals and developments at the school over the last 25 years or so. These include: • Change of use of existing school house into educational facilities (ref. no 1983/1478/03); • Construction of entrance porch (ref. no. 1997/0975/03); • Erection of single storey extensions (to provide additional classrooms, cloaks, and entrance ramp (ref. no. 2005/0173/03); • Extension to toilet facilities (western block) (ref. no. 2009/0560/03).
9. As explained above, the major extensions in 2005-06 provided significant additions to the teaching space at the School, in order to accommodate additional pupils at that time. A new teaching area of some 21 sq. m. was added to the Year 1 base in the western building, whilst a large dual-use classroom/hall of 59 sq. m. was added to the eastern building. All of the works have now been carried out, providing attractive brick built extensions with steeply pitched slate roofs and matching feature brickwork. They complement the original attractive school buildings in a particularly pleasing manner.
Description of Proposal
10. The existing school occupies steeply pitched, red brick buildings close to the road frontage of Walcote Road, with a low metal railing fence along the street frontage. The school playing field extends to the north-west side, providing an open area alongside the adjacent open countryside. The main hard playground is situated between the school buildings and the playing fields, with some play equipment and a gated access onto the highway. There is a steep embankment at the rear of the school site covered with mature trees, retaining the higher ground on this side and rising well above the roofs of the school itself.
11. The school wishes to erect a new timber classroom on a small nature garden at the rear, on an area that is enclosed by the main school at the front and the steep embankment at the rear. This ground slopes down from the foot of the bank towards the school field and is enclosed by low railing fence and retaining wall. It would form a separate teaching base for 4+ foundation pupils (expected to be at 10 pupils in Autumn 2010).
DC®. BOARD 18/03/2010 5 2010/0029/03 (2010/L173/03) - continued
12. The building would measure 9m long x 7m wide x 4.4m high, with a pitched roof overlapping by 0.5m at eaves level. It would contain toilet facilities, sinks/wet areas and individual heating system. It is intended to provide a decked veranda measuring 2m deep at the front of the building and a new ramped entrance from the existing school ground (albeit no details are provided). The building would be constructed in cedar wood shiplap boarding with shingle tiled roof.
13. The proposed position of the building indicates that it would be located tightly under the steep embankment around this side of the site, which would appear to require the removal of soils, etc to provide a level base and consequential retaining of the adjacent embankment itself. A number of small self-set trees would have to be cleared from the site, which also contains a pond area.
14. Vehicular access to the school site is available via a double gate into the playground area, to the west side of the school buildings. At the time of the previous extensions (approved 2006) a requirements was imposed for the provision of 2 off-street car parking spaces, which were subsequently identified on part of the playground inside this gate. The current application relies on the retention of these spaces, as previously conditioned. However, it seems likely that the identified area is rarely, if ever, used for off-street parking, especially now that a newly erected fenced area has been erected.
15. The school relies largely on use of a lay-by at the western end of the road frontage, which can accommodate about 7 private cars, and other on-street parking. Previously, it is understood that staff parking took place on the grass verge opposite the school, but this was abandoned for road safety reasons. There are residential properties in the converted farm buildings that front this southern side of Walcote Road and which have individual vehicular accesses on the road.
16. The supporting statement explains that ‘the development will significantly improve the capacity, quality and range of educational opportunities offered at this popular community school’. In addition, the applicant has stated that the proposed classroom would provide a new base for the 4+ class, and that the total number of pupils at the school would not be increased as a result. The additional space would ease facilities within the current Year 1 base (reducing numbers from 34 to around 24 in total). In addition, the building could provide a facility for ‘breakfast’ and after-school’ clubs. It has been confirmed that the chosen design and form of development has been influenced largely by the ‘affordability’ of the scheme (i.e. costs).
Planning Policy
17. National Planning Policy Guidance relevant to the application is set out in PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development); PPG 7 (Sustainable Development in Rural Areas). The Development Plan in this instance is made up of the East Midlands Regional Plan (EMRP) (2009) and the Harborough Local Plan (1999).
DC®. BOARD 18/03/2010 6 2010/0029/03 (2010/L173/03) - continued
National Policy Guidance
18. Planning Policy Statement 1 (PPS 1) (Delivering Sustainable Development) sets out the Government’s aims for providing sustainable development through the planning system. These include: • protecting and enhancing the natural and historic environment, the quality and character of the countryside, and existing communities; • ensuring that development supports existing communities and contributes to the creation of safe, sustainable, liveable and mixed communities with good access to jobs and key services for all members of the community; • Ensuring that development plans contribute to global sustainability by addressing the causes and potential impacts of climate change (e.g. by reducing the need to travel by the private car); and, • Providing access for all to jobs, health, education, shops, leisure and community facilities, open space, sport and recreation by ensuring that new development is located where everyone can access services or facilities on foot, bicycle or public transport rather than having to rely on access by car.
19. PPS1 seeks to raise the standards of design and environmental performance in all development, and advises that energy efficiency and ‘good’ design are proper planning considerations.
20. (PPS 7) (Sustainable Development in Rural Areas) promotes the delivery of appropriate levels of community services to support rural communities, whilst seeking to direct new development towards the most sustainable locations.
21. PPG13 (Transport) sets out the Government’s intentions to secure an integrated land use-transportation policy that reduces the growth in use of the private car and encourages alternative means of transport. It is recognised that the availability of car parking has a major influence on transport choice.
Strategic Policies
22. Policy 2 of the East Midlands Regional Plan (adopted March 2009) seeks to improve continuously the layout, design and construction of new development in order to ( inter alia) minimise energy use, maximise use of recycled materials and maintain amenity and quality of life for local people.
Local Plan Policies
23. The adopted Harborough Local Plan (2001) provides the detailed framework for the control of development in the area including the application site. Whilst this Plan covered the period to 2006 and will be superseded by the Local Development Framework in due course, many of the policies have been ‘saved’ as interim measures.
24. The application site is contained with the limits of development for South Kilworth on the local plan, and with the exception of the original school house, the site is identified as being ‘important open land’ on this north-eastern edge of the village. Policy IN/1 seeks to achieve a good standard of layout and design, in keeping with the scale and character of its surroundings, including (inter alia) the following criteria: DC®. BOARD 18/03/2010 7 2010/0029/03 (2010/L173/03) - continued
• New development should respect the form and scale of adjacent properties and the street scene; • Proposals should not adversely affect the established character of the surrounding area in terms of scale, space around buildings, design, colour and texture of materials; • The characteristics and features of the site should be respected, including vegetation, gradient and aspect and views into and out of the site; • Important features such as walls, trees and hedges should be retained. • Development would not lead to unsafe highway situation or unacceptable levels of traffic; • Adequate provision should be made for vehicle parking off the highway (identified as 1 space per member of staff + 3 additional spaces at schools); • New development should not adversely affect amenities of neighbours; • Adequate drainage facilities; • Retention of areas of ecological interest and creation of wildlife habitats; • Energy conservation through the location, external layout and design of new development.
25. Policy HS/9 provides that proposed development on the area of important open land should be resisted, unless it would: • cause no harm to those aspects of the land that contribute to the form and character of the settlement; or • result in positive benefits to such character and appearance; or • is essential for the operational requirements of the land use and no alternative site is available.
26. Policy LR/4 states that development of new facilities, or extensions to existing facilities, on educational land will be permitted, subject to design, access, parking and amenity considerations.
Consultations
Harborough Borough Council – Planning
27. No objections, subject to the railings enclosing the current garden being retained. The siting of the building away from gap between the buildings would further reduce the impact on the street scene.
South Kilworth Parish Council
28. No response at the time of the report being prepared.
Highway Authority
29. Currently, the School does not benefit from off-street parking facilities and parking takes place on or adjacent to the public highway, which has been a long- standing concern in the vicinity of the site. The proposal offers no commensurate increase in off-street parking facilities and, if this development has the potential to increase pupil and staff numbers at the school, the increase school’s capacity (planned or not) cannot be supported from a highway point of view.
DC®. BOARD 18/03/2010 8 2010/0029/03 (2010/L173/03) - continued
30. South Kilworth is a relatively small and isolated rural settlement, and there is very limited potential for those living outside the village to walk, cycle or use public transport. As new development is strictly controlled within the village, it seems logical that any additional capacity will be taken up by pupils from surrounding settlements. The consequent reliance on car borne traffic would be contrary to advice set out in PPS1, PPS7 and PPG13.
Ecological Advice
31. Records show that badgers have been recorded in close proximity to the application site. If footings or foundations or use of heavy machinery is proposed within the application area, then it is recommended that the area be surveyed for the presence of badgers.
Publicity
32. The proposal has been advertised by site notices and near neighbours have been notified by letters, posted on 7 th January 2010. One letter of representation has been received from occupiers of a dwelling opposite the school site.
Representation
33. Whilst not wishing to stifle progress or improvements in school achievements, the occupiers of The Granary object formally to the proposed development. Reference is made to representations at the time of the earlier 2005 planning application and the subsequent requirement for 2 off-street car parking spaces. It is claimed that these spaces are never used and consequently all vehicle parking associated with that earlier development uses the public highway. This situation is expected to be exacerbated by any additional teaching accommodation.
34. There has to be an optimum number of pupils, classrooms and teachers for a small school of this size in a small community, with limited accessibility. It is not possible to keep adding extra capacity within the school, given the impact from the inevitable increase in teachers, visitors, etc.
Assessment of Proposal
35. As with any other application, this proposal must be determined in accordance with the development plan, unless other material considerations indicate otherwise. It is considered that the relevant material considerations in this particular case are as follows:
• the principle of the development in the context of relevant location policies; • the scale, design and appearance of the development, as assessed against relevant policy criteria; • the sustainable credentials and energy efficiencies of the proposed design; • the impacts of the development in terms of the potential capacity of the school and its impacts on the locality; • any parking and/or highway safety considerations • in the event of likely adverse impacts, any specific ‘need’ for the development DC®. BOARD 18/03/2010 9 2010/0029/03 (2010/L173/03) - continued
36. In terms of the principle of the development , there is no objection per se to educational activities on the existing school site, within the built-up framework of the settlement, but subject to satisfactory scale, design, energy efficiency, highway implications and local amenity (as Policy LR/4). In the context of Policy HS/9 the proposed design of the building could not be said to contribute positively to the character and appearance of this attractive village setting, although the impact of the ‘important open area’ is largely reduced by the containment of the building between existing development and the embankment at the rear.
37. Nonetheless, it is considered that any new buildings on the site should be in keeping with the design and appearance of the existing development, which has a pleasing ‘traditional’ appearance. Indeed, significant efforts were made at the time of the earlier 2006 extensions to achieve a quality development, and such principle should apply to the whole site. In the context of Policy IN/1 clearly the design, colour and texture of the proposed building differs from the existing school buildings, and will appear ‘alien’ to users within the site. The impact on existing vegetation and gradients appear to be reasonable, walls will be retained and those trees to be lost are insignificant.
38. There would be no adverse impacts on ecological interests, subject to steps being taken to safeguard any badgers in the vicinity. Those criteria of Policy IN/1 relating to parking, amenity and energy conservation are dealt with below.
39. The County Council is looking to achieve excellent BREEAM standards (of energy efficiency) in its developments and is responsible for carbon reduction levels in all its school buildings. The County Council will be taking up future maintenance of the proposed building. Given its method and materials of construction, proposed means of heating, etc the development would fall short of the desired standards. It terms of its energy efficiency, PPS 1 and Policy IN/1 of the Local Plan seek to ensure that any new development achieve suitably high standards. The proposed materials, form of construction and installations do not fulfil these objectives.
40. If the proposed classroom structure is erected on site, notwithstanding its timber construction, it would be likely to be retained on site for many years and become a ‘semi-permanent’ addition to the school premises. In such circumstances, it is necessary to consider the likely longer term implications of the development and potential impacts . Notwithstanding the applicant’s statement that the overall number of pupils at the school would remain unchanged (at 70 pupils), it would be impractical (if not unlawful) for the planning authority to impose a condition to this purpose. In effect, it would not be possible to limit the capacity of the school.
41. At present, there is a total 63 sq.m. of teaching space/classroom in the western building and 127sq m. (47sq. m. classroom and 60 sq.m. hall/library) in the eastern building, + separate IT room. All these figures exclude ancillary offices, toilets, cloaks and lobby. At the time of the 2006 extensions, the 60 sq. m. space in the eastern block was designated ‘proposed classroom extension’. Taking all these figures into account, there is a potential 190 sq. m. of classroom space in the school for a capacity 70 pupils, well above the recommended requirements for such size of school.
DC®. BOARD 18/03/2010 10 2010/0029/03 (2010/L173/03) - continued
42. Whilst it is accepted that space requirements are subject to division of year groups, it seems apparent that the re-organisation of existing space is entirely practical to meet current requirements, particularly if better use is made of the ‘hall/library’ as (the originally intended) classroom. For instance, a school of this size would normally be expected to have 19 sq. m. of library space. In the circumstances, it would seem that the desire to create a separate foundation classroom can be facilitated within the existing accommodation.
43. If the proposed new building is erected on site, it would provide an extra 63 sq. m. of teaching space, bringing the total potential classroom accommodation up to 250 sq. m. at the school. As mentioned above, one erected, there would be no control over the actual use of the various spaces, and no control over total pupil numbers at the school. The additional capacity would enable the creation of (say) a 15-place entry (PAL), which in turn would generate a 105-place school. The CYPS Department has indicated that it would not be able to prevent any such increase in pupil numbers (if the notional space is available), but the school lacks the ‘infrastructure’ to support such increase in numbers.
44. Furthermore, there would be implications for the overall impacts of the school within the locality, as any increase in pupil numbers would no doubt increase staffing levels, related parking requirements, and traffic movements. There are implications for the ‘sustainability’ of the development in a rural location where there is little prospect of growth in the catchment area, and the consequential generation of car borne journeys. It the circumstances where the Education Authority cannot justify an essential need, these are valid concerns.
45. In essence, it is considered that the proposed development would provide the opportunity for significant proportional expansion of a small school in the (near) future, which could not reasonably be constrained by condition, and which could result in an over-intensive form of development on the school site and result in unwarranted travel-to-school journeys.
46. Dealing with the specific highway safety and parking issues affecting the site, clearly there is inadequate capacity on the school site to accommodate existing staff requirements. Local plan criteria suggest a need for a significant number of dedicated off-street spaces, and the previously identified 2 spaces are limited and (it seems) unused. This situation has been addressed partly by the lay-by in Walcote Road, although its use is shared at times by parental parking.
47. Any increase in pupil and/or staffing numbers would doubtless generate additional on-street parking requirements, exacerbating the current situation. As implied in the comments from the Highway Authority, any growth in school capacity would be most likely to generate car-borne journeys from beyond the immediate locality. Whilst the impacts on highway safety might be considered marginal (yet still undesirable), the generation of additional private car journeys conflicts with national and regional policy objectives.
Conclusions
48. There is no objection to the principle of educational facilities on this school site, but any such development should meet appropriate design, energy efficiency and
DC®. BOARD 18/03/2010 11 2010/0029/03 (2010/L173/03) - continued
highway and amenity standards. The development fails to fulfil the above objectives, because the chosen solution is driven largely by ‘cost’ considerations.
49. Moreover, it has the potential to result in an unsustainable increase in the size of the school. On balance, notwithstanding the stated intentions of the applicant, it is considered that the development is unacceptable for these reasons, especially as there appears to be adequate facilities within the existing premises to achieve the desired educational objectives.
Recommendation
A. Refuse for the reasons set out in the appendix.
B. To endorse, as required by the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995 (as amended) a summary of the:
(i) Policies and proposals in the development plan which are relevant to the decision, as follows:
This application has been determined in accordance with the Town and Country Planning Acts, and in the context of the Government’s current planning policy guidance and the relevant circulars, together with the relevant Development Plan policies, including the following, and those referred to under the specific conditions, as set out in the appendix:
East Midlands Regional Plan: Policy 2
Harborough Local Plan (1999): Policies IN/1; HS/9; and LR/4
DC®. BOARD 18/03/2010 12 APPENDIX 2010/0029/03 –continued
Refuse , for the following reasons:
Although the proposed building is relatively well screened at the rear of the site, the design, appearance, energy efficiency and materials of construction do not complement the existing attractive school building on this site. It is most likely to become used as a semi-permanent structure over many years. As such it would conflict with the objectives of Policies IN/1 and LR/4 of the (saved) Harborough Local Plan. If and when an on-going need for additional accommodation is established, then it should be provided in a more appropriate complementary permanent structure, in the interests of good design principles.
The development would result in an increase in accommodation at the school, which would provide potential for a significant proportional increase in pupil capacity in the future, which the CPA would not be able to prevent by any reasonable means. As such, the possible expansion of the school would result in concomitant increase in the requirements for staffing levels, off-street parking requirements and ancillary facilities on the site. These requirements cannot be readily accommodated on site, resulting in over-development of this restricted curtilage, contrary to the intentions of Policies IN/1; HS/9 (area of important open space) and LR/4 of the (saved) Harborough Local Plan.
Whilst acknowledging the desirability of sustaining this valuable community facility to meet the educational needs within its immediate catchment area, the school is located within a relatively isolated rural location, where it is intended that new development should not be allowed that could result in unsustainable patterns of travel. There is no prospect of a material increase in the number of pupils within the catchment area in the foreseeable future. Therefore, any subsequent increase in pupil (and staffing) numbers would be most likely to generate car-borne journeys of an unsustainable nature, contrary to the objectives of PPS1; PPS7 and PPG13.
There is no overriding justification to set aside the above objections, especially as there appears to be sufficient accommodation within the existing school premises on the site, to meet the educational requirements of the projected pupil numbers in a practical manner. ______
DC®. BOARD 18/03/2010 13
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL AND REGULATORY BOARD
The considerations set out below apply to all preceding applications.
EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES IMPLICATIONS
Unless otherwise stated in the report there are no discernible equal opportunities implications.
IMPLICATIONS FOR DISABLED PERSONS
On all educational proposals the Director of Children’s Services and the Director of Corporate Resources will be informed as follows:
Note to Applicant Department
Your attention is drawn to the provisions of the Chronically Sick and Disabled Person’s Act 1970, the Design Note 18 “Access for the Disabled People to Educational Buildings” 1984 and to the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. You are advised to contact the County Council’s Assistant Personnel Officer (Disabled People) if you require further advice on this aspect of the proposal.
COMMUNITY SAFETY IMPLICATIONS
Section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 places a very broad duty on all local authorities 'to exercise its various functions with due regard to the likely effect of the exercise of those functions on, and the need to do all reasonably can to prevent, crime and disorder in its area'. Unless otherwise stated in the report, there are no discernible implications for crime reduction or community safety.
BACKGROUND PAPERS
Unless otherwise stated in the report the background papers used in the preparation of this report are available on the relevant planning application files.
SECTION 38(6) OF PLANNING AND COMPULSORY PURCHASE ACT 2004
Members are reminded that Section 38(6) of the 2004 Act requires that:
“If regard is to be had to the development plan for the purpose of any determination to be made under the planning Acts the determination must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.”
Any relevant provisions of the development plan are identified in the individual reports.
The circumstances in which the Board is required to “have regard” to the development plan are given in the Town and Country Planning Act 1990:
Section 70(2) : determination of applications; Section 77(4) : called-in applications (applying s. 70); Section 79(4) : planning appeals (applying s. 70); Section 81(3) : provisions relating to compensation directions by Secretary of State (this section is repealed by the Planning and Compensation Act 1991); Section 91(2) : power to vary period in statutory condition requiring development to be begun; Section 92(6) : power to vary applicable period for outline planning permission; Section 97(2) : revocation or modification of planning permission; Section 102(1) : discontinuance orders; Section 172(1) : enforcement notices; Section 177(2) : Secretary of State’s power to grant planning permission on enforcement appeal; Section 226(2) : compulsory acquisition of land for planning purposes; Section 294(3) : special enforcement notices in relation to Crown land; Sched. 9 para (1) : minerals discontinuance orders.
DC®. BOARD 18/03/2010