Decision details

WSCC/028/18/WPSingle Storey Extension to Existing School Comprising 3 No.  Classrooms, Hall, Kitchen & Ancillary Accommodation, Additional Parking & External Works.  Crawley Down Village C of E Primary School, Hophurst Drive, Crawley Down, West Sussex, RH10 4XA

71.1   The Committee considered a report, as amended by the agenda update sheet, by the Head of Planning Services (copy appended to the signed minutes).  The report was introduced by Benjamin Marshall, Apprentice Planner who provided a presentation on the proposals, details of consultation and key issues in respect of the application. 

71.2   Mr Oliver Durcombe, Head Teacher of Crawley Down Village C of E Primary School, spoke in support of the application.  An increase in housing means not all local children are able to attend the school due to lack of places.  The committee papers state there are 315 pupils with an increase of 15 pupils per year from September 2019.  This is inaccurate: there are currently 373 pupils and the intake has increased over the last three years.  The school is now full and there is a waiting list.  The main school building is no longer suitable; corridors, hall, toilets (60 reception children share 3 toilets) and kitchen cannot cope.  Modular classrooms added in 2016 provide enough space, but shared spaces are the biggest concern.  Health and safety concerns have been raised by Governors.  The proposed new development will accommodate the full 2 forms of entry as it moves through the school.  Increased group room spaces will enable more 1:1 and small group tuition.  The development retains a large proportion of the playing fields and provides additional hard play space.  The netball court will allow community use.  The children of Crawley Down should be able to attend their local school which should be fit for purpose.

71.3   During the debate the Committee raised the points below and clarification was provided by the Planning Officers, where applicable:

Loss of trees and five year replanting and maintenance plan

Points raised – The loss of two trees was noted as being unfortunate but replanting was acknowledged.  A new condition should be included, based on standard wording, requiring a five year replanting and maintenance plan.

Response – Should the Committee wish to propose a condition requiring a five year replanting and maintenance plan then this would appear reasonable.

Need for the development

Point raised – Members noted the importance of enabling local children to attend their local school.

Response – None required.

Impact on residential amenity

Points raised – The impact on residential amenity and, in particular, one address in Hophurst Drive, was noted.  However, the need for the development outweighs these impacts.

Response – None required.

Netball Court

Points raised – It is disappointing to see that the netball court will not be lit, which will limit community use to daylight hours; what is the reason for this?  What was the response to this from Sport England?

Response – Sport England, on re-consultation, requested a Community Use Agreement.  Sports England were aware of and noted the lack of floodlighting.  However, the overall provision of usable play space enables the proposal to meet their tests.  There is no lighting because the netball court is close to residential properties to the north.  Officers highlighted that in these circumstances, there is always a balance between community use and mitigating against adverse impacts upon neighbouring properties.

Hours of construction

Point raised – Can deliveries during hours of construction be prevented during peak drop off and pick up times, for the purposes of children’s safety?

Response – Should the Committee wish to propose such restrictions, officers consider that this would appear reasonable.

Size of the site

Points raised – Clarification of the size of the site was requested.

Response – The ‘red line’ development area is 0.63 hectares.

71.4  Mr S Oakley proposed that new condition should be included, based on standard wording, requiring a five year replanting and maintenance plan.  This was seconded by Lt. Cdr. Atkins, and put to the Committee and approved unanimously.  The final form of wording of the condition was delegated to the County Planning Team Manager.

71.5  Mr Barrett-Miles proposed an amendment to condition 4 - Deliveries requesting that no construction related vehicles movements should take place in a specified period at the beginning and end of the school day.  This was seconded by Mr Oakley, and put to the Committee and approved by a majority.  Details of hours of exclusion were delegated to the County Planning Team Manager.

71.6   The substantive recommendation, as amended by the agenda update sheet and also by changes to conditions agreed by the Committee, was proposed by Mr Barrett-Miles and seconded by Lt. Cdr. Atkins and was put to the Committee and approved unanimously.

71.7   Resolved – That planning permission be granted subject to amended conditions and informatives set out in Appendix 1 of the report, as agreed by the Committee.