Agenda item

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an application for the demolition of the existing main school and erection of two three storey school buildings, relocation of hard courts; reconfiguration and increase in car parking provision; and associated landscaping.

The Chief Planning Officer submitted a report which set out details of an application which sought the demolition of the existing main school and erection of two, three storey school buildings, relocation of hard courts; reconfiguration and increase in car parking provision and associated landscaping at Guiseley School, Fieldhead Road, Guiseley, Leeds, LS20 8DT.

Members visited the site prior to the Meeting. Site photographs and plans were displayed and referred to throughout the discussion of the application.

Planning Officers addressed the Panel, speaking in detail about the proposal and highlighted the following:

·  Site/ location/ context

·  The proposal was to demolish the majority of the existing school buildings and replace with two, three storey blocks

·  Provision of new hard-court play areas

·  The site changes in levels (Step down)

·  Existing car park to be extended by 51 car parking spaces

·  Changes to existing loop system

·  New pedestrian access

·  Landscaping and tree planting to provide screening

·  The proposal exceeds the separation requirement (Spatial standards) to nearby housing

·  No over-shadowing or dominance to nearby properties

·  Construction arrangements to be accessed off Back Lane

·  The majority of representations received consider the proposed development to be positive transforming a visually poor site into a modern community asset. There was some concerns from local residents about the potential impact the development would have upon their living conditions due the massing of the development, overlooking issues and the landscaping proposals reduce light to their properties.

The Panel then heard from a local resident who was objecting to the proposal.

It was stated that although she was not objecting to the proposal to build a new school, her and many of her neighbours on Back Lane were concerned that the new development was over dominant and there was a loss of outlook together with a loss of privacy. Referring to the Household Design Guide the resident said new development should not be over dominant on existing properties and should not be overlooked. It was her opinion and that of her neighbours that the current proposals should be resisted, there was scope to do more about the design of this development.

The Panel then heard from another local resident also objecting to the proposal.

He said he was also not opposed to the principle of the development his concerns were about the loss of light to his property and the impact it would have on his garden. He suggested that careful consideration should be given to the landscape proposals to ensure the appropriate species of trees and hedges were planted to not make the garden areas along Back Lane be too dark. It was also understood that there may be asbestos on the site with potential for health and safety concerns during the demolition phase of the development.

The Panel then heard from a third local resident also objecting to the proposal.

He said he was not opposed to the development his concerns were also about the landscaping and screening proposals for the scheme. The resident suggested that a hard line of trees and hedges would prevent sunlight penetrating into his and his neighbours rear gardens. He suggested that the species of trees/ hedges and there location required careful consideration to avoid creating a dense canopy.

Members raised the following questions:

·  Clarification was sought from the speakers that  there was no objection  to the rebuilding of the school, and that the concerns were  mainly about the landscape and screening proposals

·  Given there’s a distance of 50m between the school and nearby properties, do you considered this to be a significant over-looking issue, how could the resident’s concerns be addressed

In responding to the issues raised:-

·  Members were informed that the majority of the concerns raised by local residents were not about the rebuilding of the school, it was about the proposals for landscaping and screening and that residents should be consulted on those proposals

·  Members were informed that frosted / opaque glazing on some of the upper level could address resident’s concerns about overlooking

Commenting on the concerns of overlooking, the Planning Case Officer suggested the separation distance between the school and nearby residential properties was generous (and in excessive of the spatial needs requirements) and it was considered that frosted/ opaque glazing would not be appropriate. Referring to the landscaping concerns and the suggestions put forward by objectors to avoid creating a dense canopy, the Officer accepted the suggestions were positive and proposed that any new planting would be done in a way to interact with the native planting, Mountain Ash and Hornbeam were suggested as the species of tree to be used. Responding to the concerns about asbestos the Planning Case Officer confirmed that an asbestos identification survey would be conducted with any removal being carefully controlled.

The Panel then heard from, Head teacher of Guiseley School and the Planning Consultant who spoke in support of the application.

Members were informed that the school was built in 1962 with a capacity of 600 pupils, the current capacity of the school was now 1400 pupils. The school was currently in a poor state of disrepair with approximately £2.7m required to address the worst areas of the school building. Following extensive engagement with the Education Funding Authority the necessary funding had been obtained to seek redevelopment of the school, including the demolition of existing school buildings and the erection of two three storey school buildings, relocation of hard courts, reconfiguration and increase in car parking provision and associate landscaping. It was understood that the existing school would continue to operate while the new school buildings were being built. Members were informed that the proposal had received overwhelming support from both staff and students.

Commenting on the concerns raised by local residents, the Planning consultant said there was ample separation distance between the school and nearby residential properties (50m) and the landscaping concerns raised by residents on Back Lane had been addressed.

Members raised the following questions:

·  At the site visit this morning, the pick-up and drop off area appeared to be constrained by parked cars, would this issue be addressed in the new proposal

In responding to the issues raised, the applicant’s representative said:

·  Members were informed that the area referred to was currently a parking area not a drop-off zone. Under the new proposals the area would be redesigned to create a drop-off loop.

In offering comments Members raised the following issues:

·  Members were generally supportive of the application suggesting that it was a good scheme

·  One Member said that the suggestion of using frosted/ opaque glazing to avoid over- looking to nearby properties was unacceptable given a separation distance of 50m

·  Further  consultation should take place with local residents concerned at the landscaping proposals

·  Could further consideration be given to the new building design

In summing up the Chair thanked all parties for their attendance and contributions suggesting Members appeared to be supportive of the application. There were concerns about the landscaping proposals but it was envisaged these could be overcome with further consultation with local residents. 

RESOLVED – That the application be approved subject to the conditions specified in the submitted report with an amendment to Condition No. 8 requiring residents on Back lane to be consulted on the proposed landscaping arrangements to the rear of their properties. That two further conditions be added requiring the submission of window details to fully understand recess and design and the inclusion of an Employment of a Skills Strategy.