Agenda item

To consider a report by the Chief Planning Officer which seeks approval for the siting of a detached Classroom Block at SLP College, Main Street, Garforth, Leeds 25.

(Report attached)

The report of the Chief Planning Officer sought permission to site a modular classroom building within the site of the SLP College complex. It was proposed that the classroom building would be single storey with a shallow dual pitched roof. It was proposed that the building would have a grey/ blue rendered elevation to its sides and the inward facing elevation and a red brick finish applied to the elevation facing Main Street.

This application was brought to Plans Panel at the request of Ward Members, Councillors Mark Dobson and Sarah Field for reasons relating to the college’s site slow encroachment on the surrounding public amenity.

Members were informed that the proposed building stands on an area of crushed hardcore lying between two established two storey properties and adjacent to the college’s existing car park. The proposed building would be set back from the site’s Main Street frontage and the adjacent flanking buildings. The proposal included some tree planting to the front.

Members were informed that the classroom would accommodate an open teaching space with associated entrance lobby and storage room. The teaching space would be used to cater for academic study and acting classes to meet educational and disabled access requirements. The current space used had no disabled access.

Members noted that the applicant had obtained planning permission to re-develop this portion of the site in 2008 for a 3 storey building containing a retail unit, recording studio and a flat above. This was not implemented due to financial reasons and the permission had now lapsed.

Members also noted that the classroom would accommodate 5 classes a day with the classroom used between 08:15 -19:00hours Monday –Friday and 09:00 – 17:00hours on Saturday during college term time.

The Panel were informed that the classes would not involve music and would be tutor led catering for existing student numbers and would share the associated parking and other facilities within the college site.

Members had visited the site the morning of the meeting and were shown plans and photographs at the meeting.

The Members who had attended the site visit had asked if the windows for the building could be located on Main Street. Members noted that officers had said that this would be possible.  It was also noted that a ramp would be needed to allow disabled access.

The Officer informed the Panel that the applicant had been agreeable to the temporary siting of the building for 3 years rather that the proposed 5 years set out on the report.

Ms Cliff attended the meeting to speak against the recommendation and informed the Panel the residents have had ongoing issues with the college for a number of years. She said that there had been issues with traffic in the area particularly on Chapel Lane with the amount of traffic picking up and dropping students, not enough parking bays to cater for all attending and working at the college, not enough disabled parking, blocking of driveways, and difficulty crossing the road. She said that this was worse at the weekends.

Ms Cliffe said that she had been of the view that the 2008 permission outlined at 2.3 of the submitted report had not been implemented. She said that 200 residents had objected and the residents had been informed that no further building would take place on the site.

Ms Cliffe informed the Members that her property was located central to the car parking area with residential properties surrounding it. She explained that the deliveries had always taken place at the site but the traffic had not been as bad when it was a warehouse for musical instruments.

Ms Cliffe informed the Panel that a traffic survey had been conducted on a Sunday and they had counted 15 cars accessing the site within 5 minutes.

Ms Jenkins the applicant was also in attendance at the meeting and informed the Panel that the college had been operating at Chapel Lane for 25 years. She said that the college had not been able to complete on the 2008 permission due to the recession. Ms Jenkins explained that the college was partially funded by Central Government but with this funding came higher level BA courses which had meant a move to more written exams.

Ms Jenkins informed the Members that the college had been rated by Ofsted as outstanding at the last inspection and that they were the only dance theatre college to attain this level in the North of England. She said that 130 was the maximum capacity of students and that no more students would be at the school should the building be granted.

She said that there had always been issues with traffic congestion on Chapel Lane but that most of the traffic is due to the shops and bank located on Main Street.

Ms Jenkins told the Panel that the college was open from 7:30am with classes starting at 8:30am finishing at around 9:00pm. The college only stayed open till 10:00pm when there was a show. She also explained the weekend use of the college and said that the college was only used on Sunday’s during exams.

Ms Jenkins said that she had used the Hall next door but could not always get access and there was no disabled access which was needed for both staff and students.

When asked, Ms Jenkins said that it was difficult to consult with residents in the area and that she had received a number of complaints over the years relating mainly to parking. Ms Jenkins was of the view that the issues relating to parking were from the bank and the beauty parlour on Main Street.

The Panel were informed that there was no specific policy document relating to temporary buildings. The Panel also noted that there was no enforcement matters for this site.

The Highways assessment considered the fact that the proposals did not include any addition to the existing pupil and staff numbers. As a result there would be no additional demand on car parking at the site associated with the proposed development. In addition, the temporary nature of the planning permission was considered.

Members discussed the following points:

·  Ramp for disabled access to be the same door other students use

·  Front facing windows on to Main Street

·  Sound proofing to the building

·  To see if larger premises may be more suitable

·  Consultation between college and residents to address issues

·  Parking issues

·  Landscaping to front of site

·  Issues relating to whether a dance school or a college

·  Operating hours of the college

·  Number of students attending the college

RESOLVED – The North and East Plans Panel resolved to defer the application until clarification is sought on the following:

·  Full assessment for car parking for both staff and students

·  Operating hours of the college

·  Potential restriction on students and hours of use

·  Rotation of the building by 90 degrees to allow windows to frontage of building

·  Acoustic measures to restrict noise both from inside and outside the building

·  Clarify if dance school or college