Decision status: For Determination
Is Key decision?: No
Is subject to call in?: No
The Committee considered a report on the above application for the removal of temporary classroom and erection of a detached two storey building to provide additional education facilities to existing school and alterations of land bank to provide enlarged play space.
In response to Member questions the officers confirmed that the proposed development was of similar height and materials as the other school buildings on the site. Furthermore, the Council did consult the London Borough of Croydon due to the proximity of the borough boundary and had received no objections.
Kieran Holliday, Jim Pierce, Simon Garner and Marie Curzon, the applicant, addressed the meeting under Standing Order 31.
The principal issues raised by Kieran Holliday were:-
· 4,000 primary school places had been commissioned and it was now necessary to commission secondary school places.
· Located close to the borough boundary with the London Borough of Croydon, but that priority would be given to Sutton pupils.
The principal issues raised by Jim Pierce were:-
· A feasibility study of the school site had been completed which looked at possible overlooking, amenity and tree removal.
· The development had been moved approximately 6 metres to the south to avoid damage to a beech tree and to improve the outlook for neighbours.
· Obscured glazing would be used on the first floor.
· The trees that would be removed would be replaced and an arboreal consultant had been hired.
· The development would act a noise buffer to surrounding neighbours.
The principal issues raised by Simon Garner were:-
· A transport assessment had been carried out.
· The school had a gold travel plan.
· Parking survey had been completed at the end of the school day it had been found that there was capacity for over 700 cars in the surrounding roads.
· Problems had been identified directly outside the school, however the school were deploying staff to monitor the school gates and advise parents.
In response to Member questions Mr Pierce stated that it should be possible to replace trees that were to be felled on a 2:1 basis. The committee were also informed that eight out of ten trees to be removed were less than three years old. Mr Pierce further informed the committee that the obscured glazing was being installed at the request of the neighbour, however it would be possible to discuss with the Tree Officer as to whether it was viable to plan a fast growing tree to obscure the windows also.
The Tree Officer confirmed that a survey of ash trees had been completed for the site and that ash dieback had been identified in a neighbouring borough.
The Head of Planning suggested that Condition 9 was amended so the landscaping scheme including replacement tree planting was to be submitted to the Council for approval.
A poll vote on the officers’ recommendation to grant permission was held in accordance with Standing Order 31.4, when there voted:
To grant (10) Councillors Samantha Bourne, Mary Burstow, Richard Clifton, Margaret Court, Vincent Galligan, Patrick McManus, Hamish Pollock, Jason Reynolds, Tony Shields and Graham Whitham
Resolved: That planning permission be granted for application No. D2015/72166/FUL, subject to the conditions, reasons and informatives set out in the Appendix to these Minutes.
Publication date: 06/10/2015
Date of decision: 30/09/2015
Decided at meeting: 30/09/2015 - Planning Committee