Report of the Executive Head of Planning and Transportation (ENCLOSURE).

The Committee considered a report on the above application for the erection of a detached two storey building comprising six additional classrooms with office and storage accommodation.

In response to questions officers explained that the cantilevered balcony would be on the playground side of the proposed building, which would provide an acoustic barrier and so it was unlikely to create a noise nuisance; that it was difficult to get a true impression of the proposed east elevation from a two dimensional drawing; that it was believed none of the houses in Warwick Road would suffer from a loss of light when calculated using accepted measurement methods; that any loss of outlook for local residents had to be balanced against the benefits of the proposed development to the School; that a recommended condition provided for crime prevention measures; and that the potential loss of two trees had to be balanced against the deterrence of anti-social behaviour and maximising the area of the playground.  The School’s intentions, if any, to use the proposed building outside school hours were not known.

Mr Tony Phelan, an objector, addressed the meeting under Standing Order 33, and Mr Gordon Ironside replied for the applicant.

The principal issues raised by Mr Phelan were:-

• Residents had been consulted on only one night in winter
• At present the properties in Warwick Road were three metres from the existing building, including a 1.5 metre public footpath
• The existing railing on the School’s boundary should remain and the proposed building be constructed within the boundary
• The proposed building would overshadow 50% of the area of the gardens in Warwick Road
• Roof lights in the proposed building would be opened and lead to increased noise
• The School had become a business from 6 am to 10 pm each day
• The proposed building should be constructed on the same line as the existing building to avoid the loss of two trees
• The School used the playground for sport instead of its own sports hall

In response to questions officers explained that, although the proposed building was shown as being constructed on the boundary, the School intended to have planting against the new wall.  The proposed planting needed to be confirmed but it would not be able to encroach on the public footpath.

The principal issues raised by Mr Ironside were:-

• The School was short of specialist accommodation and some classrooms were too small
• The School had developed a master plan to meet its needs, which envisaged building on the perimeter of the site rather than creating one large building
• Some grants for building development were time limited
• The ability of the proposed building to create an acoustic barrier had been considered an attraction
• The School would support a gated footpath on its boundary
• The police were satisfied with the crime prevention details of the proposal
• The proposed sedum roof was considered to be attractive
• The design had been developed to meet the School’s needs and to meet comments
• There would be no openable  ...  view the full minutes text for item 567