Loading document...
Office of the Minister and Chief Executive
Telephone (01624)685859 Fax (01624)685945 Email: [email protected] Contact: Margaret Clague Our Ref: ITT/MC Your ref: Date: 2nd March 2011.
Dear Sir/Madam,
ON APPEAL: PA10/702/B – Department of Education & Children – Alterations, erection of extension to provide Sports/Multi-purpose Hall with associated changing facilities, community room, classrooms and kitchen facilities and incorporation of permanent nursery provision, creation of parking and new access, Victoria Road Primary School, School Lane, Castletown, IM9 1BA
I refer to the recent appeal in respect of the above planning application.
In accordance with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005, I am enclosing herewith a copy of the report of the person appointed to consider this appeal.
The Minister has considered the report, concurs with the appointed person's conclusions, and accepts the recommendation that the appeal should be dismissed. Accordingly, he has directed that the Planning Committee's decision to approve the application should be confirmed albeit subject to an additional condition as referred to in paragraph 59 of the independent person's report.
Yours faithfully,
J. F. Robinson, Acting Chief Executive.
Please see over for circulation list/......
Department of Infrastructure Sea Terminal Building, Douglas, Isle of Man, IM1 2RF
TO: Kay Associates, Southgate House, 89 Circular Road, Douglas, IM1 1AX. [Copies as per Circulation List]
In pursuance of his powers under the above Act and Order, the MINISTER for Infrastructure, following report by the appointed person, does hereby APPROVE the application by - Department of Education & Children - Alterations, erection of extension to provide Sports/Multi-purpose Hall with associated changing facilities, community room, classrooms and kitchen facilities and incorporation of permanent nursery provision, creation of parking and new access, Victoria Road Primary School, School Lane, Castletown, IM9 1BA, subject to compliance with the following conditions:-
Continued/
Dated this 2^{\text {nd }} day of March 2011.
By Order of the Minister
Note 1: This permission refers only to that required under the Town and Country Planning Acts and does not include any consent or approval under any other enactment, byelaw, order or regulation.
Note 2: A copy of the report of the appointed person is appended hereto.
Application Ref: PA 10/00702/B
Report of an Inquiry, held on Tuesday 7th December 2010, into an appeal by Mr G Shimmin & Ms J Jenkinson against the grant of approval to the Department of Education and Children; for alterations and erection of extension to provide sports/multipurpose hall, community room, classrooms and kitchen facilities and incorporation of permanent nursery provision, creation of parking and new access at Victoria Road Primary School, School Lane, Castletown IM9 1BA.
| Name | Name | Position | | --- | --- | --- | | For the Appellants: | Mr G Shimmin & Ms J Jenkinson | No. 5, Pickard Close, Castletown; | | Other Objectors: | Mr M Millward | No. 10, Elizabeth Rise, Castletown; | | For the Planning Committee: | Ms J Chance, Dol Senior Planning Officer; | Ms H Fletcher, Dol Highways Engineer; | | Castletown Commissioners: | Mr J Ludford-Brooks | | | For the Applicant: | Mr D Kay, Architect, Kay Associates Ltd; | Mr R Collister, Director of Estates, Department for Education and Children (DEC); | | | Ms C Savin, Head Teacher, Victoria Road Primary School; | | | | and Ms A Katz, Chair of Board of Governors, Victoria Road Primary School | |
private but constructed to adoptable standards. There is restricted visibility in either direction at the junction with Victoria Road. 3. The existing complex is mainly a two-storey structure consisting of a pitched-roof Victorian building to the north and west, more recent twostorey pitched-roof and flat-roofed extensions to the east and southeast and a single storey extension to the south. These buildings enclose a courtyard. The tallest contains the school hall with classrooms on the first floor and an under hall storage area. To the east of the school building there is a school playing field. The site has a variable topography with the ground-floor level of the existing school hall some 5 metres higher than the lowest part of the hard playing area. The playing field has high ground towards its boundary with Elizabeth Rise and a lower flatter area towards Douglas Street. The high ground currently accommodates a mobile nursery unit and its fenced-off external hard surfaced play area.
on the outlook of no. 10 Elizabeth Rise. The decision was taken to appeal and the Minister dismissed the appeal in line with the recommendation of the independent inspector. The inspector concluded that the school extension would be seriously oppressive, overbearing and visually dominant when seen from the rear garden of no. 10 Elizabeth Rise and would overshadow the rear garden in the winter months. He acknowledged the fine balance between the educational needs of the primary schoolchildren and the impact on residential amenity and the Minister commented on the difficulty of his decision.
submitted and approved but how can this plan be approved when neighbours have not seen the proposals. 11. Since the project was proposed eight sets of neighbours have moved away suffering a substantial drop in the resale value of their properties. Neighbours come and go. As soon as Harvey gets to know a child the child moves away. Properties are "bargain buys" or "up for rent". The appellants cannot afford to move and estate agents advise that there would be a further drop in value of their home if the works go ahead. 12. If the school is outgrowing its site when money is available it should be replaced on a larger site elsewhere and temporary classrooms used in the meantime. Castletown does not need more badminton courts so why when public money is scarce is it proposed to add the additional ceiling height in order to accommodate this unwanted facility. The school already has a hall that could be brought up to date with a little bit of re-jigging. 13. In summary, they object to the size of the building, its proximity, the resulting lack of privacy and the impact that it would have on Harvey, particularly during the lengthy construction period.
Application Ref: PA 10/00702/B
additional right turning traffic seeking to enter Morton Hall Road will cause backups to the Alexander Road roundabout thereby preventing eastbound traffic moving along Victoria Road resulting in severe congestion. As an alternative, the school staff traffic could access the site from Bowling Green Road using the entrance currently used by pedestrians. Bowling Green Road is not a commuter route and its traffic flow is very low compared to Victoria Road. This alternative would ensure greater safety for the elderly and the surgery patients, whilst preventing further congestion on the main commuter route along Victoria Road.
Mr N Ennett who occupies 30 Victoria Rd beside the junction with Morton Hall Road expresses similar concerns based on everyday observations of the existing levels of congestion. He considers that Mr Craine's suggested alternative route is very sensible and should be investigated.
Mr H. Kinley, 19 Douglas St objects to the loss of part of the playing field for the staff car park. The field is already tight for children's sports and activities and the playing field should be retained intact. Morton Hall Road narrows to a point where vehicles cannot pass just before the exit on to Victoria Road. Visibility is restricted exiting onto Victoria Road and during the construction stage builders' heavy vehicles would traumatise the elderly residents of the Sandfield complex. Elizabeth Rise could be used instead, as it is safer and easier than the dangerous exit from Morton Hall Road. Significant traffic would be generated through the day and evening. Local youths would use the proposed car park as a football pitch. The external design of the building could be less intrusive.
The Castletown Local Plan 1991 identifies the school building as "school" and the playing fields as "school playing fields". The Draft Southern Plan proposes the site for civic, cultural or other use with a specific designation as "primary school". The hard play area is indicated as being within the flood plain.
Isle of Man Strategic Plan General Policy 2, Community Policies 2 and 5, Recreation Policies 1 and 2 and Transport Policy 4 are relevant to the assessment of the application. Perhaps the most pertinent, Community Policy 5 states: "Permission will generally be given for proposals to improve or extend existing schools... subject to their being sited and designed in accordance with other policies of this plan, having particular regard to the potential for community use of the buildings and associated open space." Community Facility Policy 1 of the Draft Southern Plan reiterates Community Policy 5 of the Strategic Plan. The principle of the land being used for school purposes is not disputed and consequently the extension is acceptable in principle subject to the other policies of the strategic plan, which include the amenity issues. There is no identified need for the community facilities. However given the particular regard to be paid to the potential for community use when extending schools
required by Community Policy 5 the provision of community facilities is a material planning consideration that weighs in favour of the proposal. 20. The design and appearance of the proposed structures would not match that of the existing building. However, the new building would not encroach on the principal façade. It would have a minor detrimental impact on the vista at the end of Elizabeth Rise, a 1930s development. 21. When assessing the impact on residential amenity the key properties are 10 Elizabeth Rise and 5 and 6 Pickard Close. Clven the changes in the height of the structures and the degree of separation, the extension would no longer appear unreasonably overbearing when viewed from the garden and from the rear windows of 10 Elizabeth Rise. At 5 Pickard Close the outlook to the rear from the kitchen and dining room is already dominated by the two-storey school building. The main impact, therefore, would be on the outlook from the lounge window in the gable and on the enjoyment of the garden. The appellants' concerns are understandable as there would be continuous built form along the entirety of the rear and side boundaries. In planning law there is no entitlement to protect views but the overbearing impact of the mass of the building is a planning concern. In this case, given the height and relative distances, it is considered that whilst there would be an impact on the outlook, the new building would not be unduly overbearing. There would be a similar impact on 6 Pickard Close. 22. The Strategic Plan and the other Government strategies support dual use of school facilities. In this instance additional activities are likely to occur during evenings and at weekends. Access would be made from Morton Hall Road, which is likely to be relatively quiet during the evening when the surgery is not operating. The level of community activity would be restricted by the size of the hall and community room and it is not expected that there would be large numbers of visitors for the majority of the time. There would be some loss of amenity to the residents of numbers 9 and 10 Elizabeth Rise, but this would not be at such a level as to outweigh the benefits of the scheme. A condition restricting the hours of use should be imposed to prevent any use after 10 p.m. at night. 23. The access and parking arrangements remain the same as the previous application and were adjudged satisfactory in that instance. The proposed provision of a drop-off point accessed via School Lane would improve safety. As well as staff parking the new car park off Morton Hall Road would also cater for members of the public attending out-of-school hours activities. The additional traffic generated by community use is unlikely to occur at peak flow periods. The combination of children, harassed parents and heavy traffic during the morning and afternoon peak periods is hazardous. The proposed scheme is not perfect but would serve to segregate the teachers' car parking from the parents' "drop off" facility. The one-way system for School Lane shown on drawing K213/P/10-04 would make the most of the restricted space available. A traffic management review should be undertaken to formulate a teacher/parent-
led school travel plan based on good practice elsewhere. The aim would be to improve pedestrian safety and encourage children to walk to school. 24. The government has compulsory powers available to remove vegetation and improve visibility to the left emerging from Morton Hall Road into Victoria Road. Improvement of the right-hand visibility splay would be more difficult given the visual obstruction of the adjacent building. The restricted width near the entrance to Sandfield elderly persons' complex could pose difficulties for heavy construction traffic but the problems could be eased with temporary traffic controls. Construction traffic is never ideal anywhere but it is a short-term phenomenon and is not something that normally would carry sufficient weight to justify refusal. 25. In summary, the proposed extension would meet the essential needs of the school and provide additional sporting and community space for the wider public. There would be some impact on existing levels of residential amenity but this is not considered sufficiently harmful to outweigh the benefits of the proposal. The nearest built elements are single-storey and would not be unduly oppressive. The parking accessed from Morton Hall Road is appropriately located to serve the new hall and its use by staff allows for safer facilities for the dropping off and collection of children using the School Lane entrance. The replacement of all-year round facilities provides adequate compensation for the loss of an area of playing field. As for need, it is clear that the school is lacking in facilities and account should be taken of "spikes" in the annual entry.
September snapshots show that by 9 a.m. and 10 a.m. any shadow influence is removed from the garden of no. 10. 28. The applicant has also sought to reduce the potential impact of the proposals on the occupants of nos. 5 and 6 Pickard Close, even though the impact of the previous proposals on these properties was not thought to be detrimental. Instead of the continuous two-storey block extending from the existing building the revised proposal consists of a single storey element some 1.5 metres further back. This element would have much less impact than the appotlant's photographic visualisation would suggest. Due to the use of internal ramping, the floor level of the proposed accommodation is 0.5 metres below that of the existing hall. Consequently the eaves level of the new build classrooms is some 5.135 metres lower than previously proposed. The ground floor windows would be at a lower level than the ground floor windows in the previous application. In addition, the ramp, which was a primary concern, has been removed. The distances between the rear elevations of 5 and 6 Pickard Close and the new sports/multipurpose hall are as previously proposed. However, the reduction in the effective height of the hall by 2.135 metres and the reduction of the classrooms to one-storey significantly reduces the potential impact of the proposals for the occupants of nos. 5 and 6 from the situation already judged satisfactory by the previous inspector. 29. The change in outlook from the lounge window of 5 Pickard Close as a result of the proposal would be minimal. The existing school hall and classrooms dominate the outlook from the kitchen/dining room window in the rear elevation of no. 5 and the appeal proposal would have little impact on the area of visible sky. Any view of the extension would be from an oblique angle and the revised proposals would have significantly less impact on these views than the earlier scheme. 30. In order to move the two-storey mass further away from the adjacent properties the new-build extension projects further into the sports field than in the previous application. However, the remaining space is sufficient to accommodate a primary school size football pitch and eight 80 -metre running lanes. All-year-round sports use of the hall would more than compensate for the loss of a part of the field, which in any case being on the ridge is a less suitable for sports use than the flatter portion of the field. 31. The design of the extension is traditional with masonry walls and a pitched roof finished in artificial slate to match the roof of the existing building including terracotta ridge and hip tiles. The masonry walls will complement the limestone facing of the existing building. The level of detail to the extension would be complementary to that of the original Victorian building. The mass of the sports/multipurpose hall and the classrooms has been broken down by stepping off the elevation and by positioning the single-storey elements to break up the mass. 32. Contrary to assertions that the proposals do nothing to address special educational needs, they include substantial works that allow greater
integration of disabled children into the school. Also, the school would be better able to utilise available classroom capacity to provide special educational needs tuition on a one-to-one basis as required. Should the application be approved the applicant would undertake to ensure that as far as reasonably practicable the effects of the construction phase of the scheme on the appellants' disabled child would be minimised. 33. Ms Caroline Savin, Head Teacher, Victoria Road Primary School, provided detailed information as to how the proposed scheme would help to rectify current inadequacies in accommodation at the school. She summarised the main problems to be:
Mrs Katz, Chairperson of the Board of Governors expressed strong support for the application on behalf of the Board and parents of school pupils arguing that there is a pressing need for the facilities for the children and people of Castletown. She said that the teachers are fantastic but the deficiencies in the school restrict what they can do.
The gist of the applicant's rebuttal of objections is as follows: (1) There is no case for a new school elsewhere. A new school would cost £ 10 million compared with £ 3 million for the school extension. Given the population projected in the Southern Area Plan DEC needs to provide for the future school-roll growth and the school needs additional facilities in the meantime. Mobile classrooms are temporary structures and very unsatisfactory. (2) The objectors question the need for community facilities but policy objective 2 of the loM Sport and Recreation Strategy is to provide school sports facilities that are of the highest design and quality to meet future educational and community need. The proposed hall at 274 square metres is larger than the guideline 214 square metres for assembly purposes but the hall is a sports and multi-purpose hall. It would be the only hall at the school, the existing assembly hall being converted into classroom and library facilities. As the size of hall required for assembly and performance is only marginally below that required to accommodate two badminton courts the small additional cost of the slightly enlarged hall would realise a positive benefit for the community at large. It is the policy of the Government to ensure that maximum community benefit is gained from any investment of public money and the improved facilities at the school would benefit the people of Castletown and the South as whole. (3) Department of Tourism and Leisure has advised that there is a lack of adequate badminton facilities to meet the demand in Castletown and the South. The proposal is not excessive given that two-courts hall provision is common across the Island. The assertion that Castletown already has sufficient badminton courts overlooks the fact that Castle Rushen High School the main provider for the sport in the town is unavailable for significant periods of the year. King William College courts have limited ceiling height and the court charges are more expensive than those of DEC. As in the case of the High School the King William courts are unavailable during school examinations. (4) The scheme is not just about providing for badminton. Five-a-sidefootball, basketball and netball all require a similar ceiling height. The required 7.6 metres clearance has been confined to the area of the badminton courts and is 1.35 metres lower than the previous height. DEC would be pilloried if the hall were substandard and unsuitable for sports use. Also the floor level has been reduced to effect a cumulative reduction of 2.51 metres. The multi-purpose hall will also be used for performance and roll-call purposes as well as providing properly sized indoor sports hall facilities. These would allow the full range of primary sports curriculum to be taught, which is not possible in the existing hall. That hall cannot accommodate tag rugby or basketball or quick cricket and there is no scope for physical education or an indoor runabout in bad weather. Castletown should
have what other schools have, including 5-a-side-football and sufficient space for a school concert. The Department of Community, Culture and Leisure is very supportive of the proposal. It has advised that the hall would provide a much-needed local community facility and could provide a catalyst for activity and new groups to develop. (5) It is vital to separate the proposed construction works and associated traffic from the school children. This is the reason why it is proposed to obtain access for the construction plant, equipment and materials from Morton Hall Road and to site the site construction compound on the site of the temporary mobile nursery unit. (6) The applicant's highway engineers and officers of the Dol Highways Division agree that the proposed access from Morton Hall Road is the most appropriate for the scheme. The owners of the Morton Hall access have been consulted and have raised no issues with its temporary use by construction vehicles or permanent use by staff and sports hall users. Access via Elizabeth Rise was considered but was dismissed due to its residential nature and the difference in levels between the cul-de-sac and the school site. Resolving the difference in levels would result in a greater loss of the sports field. As for the suggestion of taking access via Douglas Street / Bowling Green Road, this junction has not been used for vehicular traffic for a number of years and is narrower than the Morton Hall Road / Victoria Road junction. (7) The improved access, parking and turning arrangements are urgently needed. With cars parked either side of School Lane there is insufficient width for fire engine access. Parents have been advised to drop children off at the pedestrian access in Victoria Road but in the morning it is full of traffic, which makes dropping off very difficult. (8) Because of the topography, the proposal would not result in any significant loss of useable sports fields. This is demonstrated in the application drawings, which indicate that a primary school football pitch and running lanes, with sufficient run-off allowances can be accommodated, leaving further space for a "rounders" pitch. (9) The construction period is likely to be 12 - 15 months. Fencing would be erected to protect the playing field. A 2-metre wide protected route would be provided around the school to the playing field. The route, which would abut the gardens of nos. 5 and 6 Pickard Close, would be screened from the building site by a 2-metre high safety hoarding with an 1.5 -metre overhang rising a further 0.4 metres above ground level (see also drawing no. K213/P/10-22). There would be channels of discussion with local residents including the formulation of a working safety plan prior to the works commencing and contact / emergency arrangements during and outside working hours. Working hours would be restricted to 8.00 am to 6.00 pm Monday to Friday and 8.00 am to 1.00 pm on Saturdays. There would be no work on
Saturdays after 1.00pm and on Sundays unless agreed with the local residents, such agreement to be fully enforceable by the Environmental Health Officer. 37. The reduction in the new build and the increase in internal alteration allows the scheme to address the majority of the school's deficiencies and to provide improved public facilities for the town in a way that has less impact on surrounding residential occupants. If the appeal is upheld and approval denied it is likely that the Department would have to seek to replace the school elsewhere. This would depend on a suitable site being identified and acquired and the significant additional funding being secured. The Department's educational and community needs would not be met and there would be a significant setback for the children of Castletown.
Drawing from Section 10(4) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1999 General Policy 1 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 requires the planning authority to have regard to the provisions of the development plan and all other material considerations. Currently the development plan for the area is comprised of the Strategic Plan and the Castletown Town Plan 1991. This local plan identifies the school building as "school" and the playing fields as "school playing fields". The proposal is in broad accord with these land use designations.
I consider that the key issues in this appeal are (1) whether the proposed development accords with the development plan, in particular with the pivotal policies Community Policy 5 and General Policy 2(\mathrm{~g}),(\mathrm{h}), and (i), and (2) whether there are any other material considerations that justify the granting or refusal of planning approval. (1) The development plan
Community Policy 5 states: "Permission will generally be given for proposals to improve or extend existing schools... and to build new schools, subject to their being sited and designed in accordance with the other policies of this plan, having particular regard to the potential for community use of the buildings and the associated Open Space." The proposed multi-purpose hall and community room will cater for community performing arts and recreation outside of school hours. Consequently, a pivotal issue is whether this proposal with its potential for community use does or does not accord with the other policies in the plan.
The most pertinent policies are Strategic Policies 1, 5, and 10, General Policy 2, Community Policies 2 and 5, Recreation Policy 2 and Transport Policies 4, 6 and 7. As the alteration and extension of the existing school, the proposal would optimise the use of the land, ensure efficient use of the site and utilise existing infrastructure in accordance with Strategic Policy 1. The attractive design would resonate with and complement the predominantly hipped roof profile of the existing school and nearby housing in Elizabeth Drive, Morton Hall Road and Douglas Street and consequently would make a positive environmental contribution in compliance with Strategic Policy 5. Designed to improve pedestrian accessibility and located within an established school catchment area close to a public transport corridor the proposal accords with the requirements of Strategic Policy 10 (a), (b) and (d) and Transport Policies 1 and 6. Given the reasonable accessibility of the school to the local population of Castletown and the South including non-car users and the use of underused buildings, the proposed new community facilities comply with Community Policy 2. The all-weather indoor sports provision, community gain and improved accessibility generated by the development far outweigh the loss of a part of the existing school playing field to the multi-purpose hall and staff car park. Consequently, the requirements of Recreation 2 are more than met. I will address the issues arising from Strategic Policy 10 (c) and Transport Policies 4 and 7 shortly.
I turn next to General Policy 2(g) and the impact on the amenity of the most affected properties 10 Elizabeth Drive and nos. 5 and 6 Pickard Close. The former dwelling was singled out for particular scrutiny by the inspector at the previous appeal. In that case the two-storey development would have extended parallel to and for the full length of the boundary with 10 Elizabeth Drive. The inspector concluded that the proposed extension would be unacceptably oppressive, overbearing and visually dominant and would cause unwelcome overshadowing of the rear garden in winter months. The current proposal extends the existing school as a singlestorey structure parallel with the objectors' garden and locates the twostorey element in line with the gable-end and garage of no. 10. The twostorey multi-purpose hall is significantly lower in profile and is set some 7 metres further back from the boundary than the previous proposal. This revised building arrangement would reduce significantly the visual impact of the building on the outlook from the rear windows and patio area of no. 10 and would also allow more sunshine to reach the garden during the afternoon in the winter. In my opinion the mitigating effects of these significant amendments ensure that the proposal would no longer seriously damage the living conditions of the residents of 10 Elizabeth Rise and therefore remove the serious planning objection that led to the dismissal of the previous appeal.
Nos. 9 and 10 Elizabeth Drive could be affected to a limited extent by noise and glare due to use of the staff car park by members of the public after school hours. The parking spaces and footpath approach to the new public entrance would be screened at ground floor level by a combination of an existing wall and a drop in level to the school grounds. The lighting
in the car park could be designed to direct illumination down and away from first floor windows. Three windows in the upper level of the hall would be only some 20 metres from the gable wall of 10 Elizabeth Drive but the orientation of this dwelling is such that the principal windows would face away from potential sources of light or noise. 45. The changes that benefit 10 Elizabeth Drive have had a mixed effect on 5 and 6 Pickard Close. The reduction to single-storey of the classroom/corridor linking the existing school with the multi-purpose hall would reduce the mass and vertical scale of this element when viewed from the rear and gable windows of these properties. Absence of first-floor windows reduces the potential for overlooking. On the other hand, by placing the two-storey hall further away from 10 Elizabeth Drive the amended proposal would tend to wrap the buildings around 5 and 6 Pickard Close. However, the distance between the first-floor façade of the hall and the gable lounge window of no. 5 ( 35 metres approx.) and the rear windows of no. 6 ( 24 metres approx.) well exceed normally accepted minimum separation between opposing rear elevations of two-storey housing; in such circumstances a building opposite may dominate the rear outlook of an affected property but not to an unacceptable degree. In this case the hall is a little taller than a typical two-storey house but its hipped roof profile would help to reduce the building mass and in my judgement the proposed development would not have an unacceptable overbearing dominance when viewed from the properties in Pickard Close. 46. The new hall would be used from 8 am to 10 pm and because of its greater size and multi-functional flexibility it would be much more intensively used than the existing school hall. However, in my judgement the new hall is sufficiently far away from both 5 and 6 Pickard Close to prevent these properties being affected unduly by noise or light emissions. The existing hall, which is used for noisy activities during the school day and is only 10 metres away from the rear windows of no. 5 Pickard Close, would be converted into the school library and a spare classroom. 47. All in all, I judge that the development would not have an unreasonable impact on the amenity of nearby dwellings and I am satisfied that the architectural quality of the proposal and its resonance with the surrounding area ensures that it would not affect the character of the locality adversely. Therefore, I find that it accords with General Policy 2(\mathrm{~g}). 48. I agree that the combination of children, harassed parents and heavy traffic is potentially very hazardous. Therefore I welcome the proposed one-way system drop-off point accessed from School Lane and the segregation of the teachers' car parking from the drop-off area effected by constructing a staff car park off Morton Hall Road. This combination of safety measures would reduce significantly the traffic hazards currently threatening the safety of the school pupils. I accept that this improvement would be offset by a modest increase in the volume of traffic on Morton Hall Road and use of the substandard junction with Victoria Road. However, viewed in the round the proposal is likely to result in a significant
improvement in the safety of the local highway network and therefore exceeds the requirements of Strategic Policy 10 (c), General Policy 2 (i) and Transport Policy 4. 49. The access and parking arrangements remain the same as those adjudged satisfactory in the determination of the previous application. I do not accept that there are significant advantages in taking access via Douglas Street / Bowling Green Road. In any case, this would involve major street building works to convert an existing narrow footpath corridor into an adoptable highway and possibly compulsory acquisition of adjoining private property. I can see the practical difficulties posed by the difference in levels if access were to be obtained via Elizabeth Drive. 50. The proposed additional car parking provision should prove adequate for normal day-to-day requirements. From time to time the parking pressures created by use of the multi-functional hall for school and community performances may exceed the number of spaces available within the school grounds and this could lead to some on-street parking. However, I agree with the Committee that this is not likely to be of such frequency or significance as to warrant refusal of the application. I find the proposal in broad accord with General Policy 2 (h) and Transport Policy 7. 51. In short, I find that the proposal accords with the adopted local plan and satisfies the pivotal policies, Community Policy 5 and General Policy 2. I conclude that it accords with the development plan. (2) Other material issues 52. The previous inspector opined that it "would be wrong in principle to deliberately and permanently damage the residential amenity of a particular household in order to extend a school". In this case a family with a child with very particular and distressing care needs occupies one of the residential properties most affected. Having listened to Ms Jenkinson there is no doubt in my mind as to the severity of the stress that must be involved in the care of an autistic child with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. The appellants' personal commitment, which has included both partners taking lower paid employment in order to be better able to care for their child, is particularly impressive. For the reasons outlined earlier I have concluded that the proposal would not have an unreasonable impact on the amenity of the nearby dwellings and I am satisfied that the completed development would not add significantly to the particular difficulties faced by this family. On the other hand I do understand how the claustrophobic effect of the security hoarding / fencing during the 12- to 15-months construction phase could have a distressing impact on the appellant's family life and on Harvey in particular. The title of drawing K213/P/10-22 "Suggested Site Compound and Access Arrangements" is indicative that the proposals may be capable of adjustment. Assuming this to be the case, it strikes me that the occupants of 5 and 6 Pickard Close would benefit considerably if the security fence were set back at least 10metres from the rear boundary of no. 6 thereby reducing the vertical scale
of the fencing and enlarging the buffer strip separating these dwellings from the noise, dust and other nuisance generated within the construction site. Given the ample space available between the fence and the proposed sports hall I see no reason why this should not be practicable. For similar reasons, I welcome the willingness of DEC to seek to mitigate as far as possible the impact of the works using "channels of discussion" with local residents during the construction period. 53. The objectors have questioned the size of the multipurpose hall but DEC would have been open to severe criticism if it had not responded to the requirement in Community Policy 5 to have particular regard to the potential for community use of the buildings. As the hall size and ceiling height required for two badminton courts does not differ significantly from that needed for 5 -a-side football, basketball, netball and arts performance, the proposal ensures that maximum community benefit would be gained from the investment of public money in line with Government policy. 54. I see no sustainable objection to condition 3 of the initial approval, which requires a further external lighting plan to be submitted and approved. The condition is aimed at protection of amenity and is unexceptionable. 55. Problems caused by construction traffic using Morton Hall Road could be eased with temporary traffic controls. I concur with the Planning Committee representative that construction traffic accessing a site is a short-term phenomenon in land use planning terms and I agree that it is not something that carries sufficient weight to justify refusal in this case. 56. The nursery unit's mobile classroom is to be relocated temporarily to the hard play area, all or part of which is notated as being within the flood plain. I judge that a temporary relocation for the 12 to 15 months of the construction period would not warrant the preparation of a flood risk assessment required under Environmental Policy 10. However, details of mitigation measures to minimise the displacement of floodwater should be submitted for approval by the planning authority and the building should be removed immediately upon the completion of the permanent accommodation. If the Minister decides to grant approval, I recommend that a condition should be attached stipulating these requirements. 57. The evidence provided by the Department, the Head Teacher and the Chairperson of the Board of Governors demonstrates that there is a compelling case of educational need for the proposed additional accommodation and facilities at Victoria Road Primary School. The rebuttal evidence reported at paragraph 36 (1), particularly the significant additional cost implications, weighs heavily against meeting this need by building a new school elsewhere. Such a solution would take years to come to fruition and now that the DEC has addressed the contentious issues that led the Minister to refuse the previous application there is no land use planning reason to delay implementation of the current proposal.
G FARRINGTON Independent Inspector
14 th February 2011
.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
