Glenbrook Primary School, Clarence Avenue (Thornton) 18/03236/FUL
1. Resolve to grant conditional planning permission subject to the completion of an agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 containing the planning obligations listed in this report.
2. Agree to delegate authority to the Assistant Director of Planning, Transport and Development to:
a. Finalise the recommended conditions as set out in this report, addendums and/or PAC minutes; and
b. Negotiate, agree and finalise the planning obligations as set out in this report, addendums and/or PAC minutes pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
3. In the event that the committee resolves to refuse planning permission and there is a subsequent appeal, delegated authority is given to the Assistant Director of Planning, Transport and Development, having regard to the heads of terms set out in this report and PAC minutes, to negotiate and complete a document containing obligations pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 in order to meet the requirement of the Planning Inspector.
4. In the event that the Section 106 Agreement is not completed within (four) months of committee, delegated authority is given to the Assistant Director of Planning, Transport and Development to refuse planning permission for failure to enter into a section 106 agreement for the mitigating contributions identified in this report and the PAC minutes.
Case No. 18/03235/FUL (agenda item 2, page 1 of the agenda pack, page 1 of the addendum and page 1 of the second addendum).
The Planning Officer gave a presentation which included a summary of the report and subsequent addenda that had been published on Friday 14 December and the day of the meeting. Members were advised of the key material planning issues for consideration which included the construction of a four-storey secondary school on the existing primary school site, with entrances on Clarence Avenue and Clarence Crescent. The application for the redevelopment of the primary school had already been approved. The principle for a new secondary school was supported and would provide new school places. Car use would be discouraged through the use of a Travel Plan, and there would be contributions towards highways improvements, ‘school streets’ consultation, Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) review and additional bus capacity. Members were shown images on the existing site, views to and from the site, the proposed layout, sunlight distribution of playspace and the relationship between the new primary school and the proposed secondary school.
The agent, highways consultant and representative from Harris Federation then provided the following information in support of the application:
· Harris was an experienced provider of education and the site was capable of supporting a secondary school. The school would help to meet the urgent demand for secondary places. The new school would open in September 2020.
· There had been extensive consultation with parents, carers and community groups. The Department for Education was fully supportive of the application.
· Break and lunch times would be staggered to prevent overcrowding.
· The development would only have parking for blue badge holders and there would be no space for drop-off and pick-up of pupils.
· The applicant had undertaken a travel study and found that there would not be a severe highways impact.
· The applicant would make contributions to footpaths, cycle paths, bus services, ‘school keep clear’ road markings and a CPZ review. The travel plan would be reviewed as the number of pupils increased.
· The building would be over 30 metres from neighbouring properties, and would not affect neighbouring amenity, daylight or sunlight.
· The building would be primarily made of brick, with coloured accents for break up of the façade. The elevation of the sports hall would allow further circulation on ground level.
At 22:00 the Committee elected to proceed with the meeting for a maximum of a further 45 minutes in order to conclude the remaining matters of business.
Officers then provided the following information in response to questions from Members:
· The cycle storage was in the southwest of the site, and would all be Sheffield stands.
· There would be a number of deliveries through the week for servicing, which would use vehicles in a range of sizes. Refuse vehicles would not be able to enter the site so would have to use Clarence Avenue.
· The site was in the Clapham ‘L’ CPZ but this did not prevent servicing or deliveries. Vehicles could not be parked on ‘school keep clear’ markings. Highways improvements were included as mitigation for the impact of the development.
· The cycle lane on Clarence Avenue could be segregated, but the details would have to go through the normal design process.
· There would have to be consultation on the introduction of a ‘school streets’ scheme. Clarence Avenue was not included in the proposal for school streets as it connected the South Circular with other routes.
· Officers were aware of potential future issues relating to the Clapham Park Estate and changes in its road layouts.
· Policy required developments to meet BREEAM ‘excellent’ unless it could be justified why this was not possible, and Condition 12 reflected this.
· Neighbouring buildings were of a mixed character, and there would be considerable changes with the forthcoming Clapham Park Estate development.
· The raised sports hall would make the design appear more playful, and officers considered that brick would not suit the raised sports hall. Final materials would be subject to condition.
· There would be three sittings at lunch to prevent overcrowding, and pupils would not be allowed to leave the site at lunchtime.
· TfL had confirmed that demand would increase to the extent that additional school route bus capacity would be required. Its survey had shown that the 355 route had no spare capacity in the morning peak.
· The school would gradually fill each year. It was anticipated that when the Clapham Park Estate was complete, the intake area would be smaller, reducing the number of children who travel by bus.
· Harris operated other schools with no teacher parking and promoted park and ride and car-share schemes.
· Younger pupils would be encouraged to walk to school through the use of incentives like house points, which would develop a habit of walking to school.
· The contribution to a school streets scheme would include the costs of consultation and implementation if the scheme went forward.
The Committee considered points raised by speakers and information provided by officers in conjunction with the report before making the following observations:
· A school streets scheme would help mitigate any impact on the highway network but it was acknowledged that the introduction of such a measure would be subject to a separate process that included consultation.
· The suggestion made by ward Councillors in their written submission of establishing a construction management group should be added to the relevant condition.
· The wider area bounded by King’s Avenue and the South Circular should be explored in connection with any proposed ‘school streets’ scheme.
It was MOVED by Councillor Wilcox, SECONDED by Councillor Simpson, and
1. To GRANT planning permission subject to a Section 106 Agreement and the conditions as outlined in the officer’s report and published addenda and subject to the following:
i. An informative requesting that the scope for any ‘School Streets’ scheme to extend beyond Clarence Crescent to the wider area bounded by King’s Avenue and the South Circular be explored.
ii. An amendment to the relevant condition to add a Construction Management Group along the lines proposed by ward Councillors.
2. To delegate authority to the Assistant Director of Planning, Transport and Development to:
a. Finalise the recommended conditions as set out in the report, addendums and/or PAC minutes; and
b. Negotiate, agree and finalise the planning obligations as set out in the report, addendums and/or PAC minutes pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
3. In the event that the Section 106 Agreement is not completed within (four) months of committee, delegated authority is given to the Assistant Director of Planning, Transport and Development to refuse planning permission for failure to enter into a section 106 agreement for the mitigating contributions identified in the report and the PAC minutes.