Agenda item

Application No.191655 - Crosfields School, Shinfield, RG2 9BL

Recommendation: Conditional approval

Minutes:

Proposal:Full planning application for the proposed erection of a new senior school building, re-configuring of two entrances and demolition of existing White Building

 

Applicant: Crosfields School

 

The Committee received and reviewed a report about this application, set out in agenda pages 85 to 134.

 

The Committee were advised that the Members’ Update included:

 

·           A response from Reading Buses, withdrawing their objection;

·           A further response from Reading Borough Council, objecting to the proposal;

·           Correction to paragraph 27 to state a 1.1 percent increase;

·           Correction to paragraph 37 bullet point 3 to refer to Condition 15;

·           Correction to paragraph 42, deletion of the final sentence.

 

Craig Watson, applicant, spoke in support of the application. Craig stated that when he had joined Crosfields five years prior there was no anticipation of removal of the White Building nor expansion to accommodate GCSE students. The school had changed to a co-educational school and there was a desire from parents to keep families together throughout their secondary education. The proposals would allow for a year group of sixty pupils, with a maximum of eighty pupils per year group. Craig stated that there were no plans for inclusion of a 6th form on-site. A bus route had been introduced to the school and the school was willing to expand the route and there was a genuine desire to work with Wokingham Borough Council (WBC) with regards to this. Approximately one quarter of pupils’ on-roll were siblings, which would reduce journey trips to the school. Craig stated that the proposed removal of the White Building was regrettable, however it was inevitable. No children were taught in the White Building, and the building was unsuitable for teaching purposes. All trees proposed to be removed would be replaced, and the school wanted to allow families to be kept together.

 

Stephen Conway stated that there was a split in expert opinion regarding highways issues, with WBC’s Highways team suggesting highways issues could be minimised whilst Reading Borough Council’s (RBC’s) Highways team still had objections on highways matters. Judy Kelly, Highways Development Manager, stated that RBC wanted two junctions to be assessed and did not state that there were serious or fundamental concerns. Judy added that an initial travel plan had been submitted by the applicant, however Officers had asked for more work to be conducted on the travel plan alongside them as per the condition. Judy stated that the proposals would lead to a less than one percent increase on existing traffic levels on the affected highways.

 

Simon Weeks commented that there had been speculation that some of the highways issues in this area had been caused by changes made by RBC at a local junction. Judy Kelly stated that an approach lane had been removed at the junction several years prior.

 

Jeanette Davey, Case Officer, stated that Shinfield Parish Council had not referred to the White Building in their comments, with their focus being on highways issues. Jeanette stated that there had been significant modifications to the White Building, with many being quite unsympathetic to the original design and outlook of the building. A substantial investment would need to be made by the applicant in order to restore the current building and make it fit for purpose.

 

Rachelle Shepherd-DuBey stated that previous motions had been passed by Council requiring all Borough schools to be fitted with sprinklers when built, adding that the Fire Chiefs across the country supported sprinklers within schools. Mary Severin, Borough Solicitor, stated that sprinklers were covered by separate regulations than that of planning regulations, and the Committee were required to make a decision based on material considerations. Mary added that a motion could not override the statutory obligations of the Committee to take account of material considerations. Rachelle proposed that an informative be added, encouraging the installation of sprinklers at the proposed development. This was seconded by Stephen Conway and added as an additional Informative.

 

Andrew Mickleburgh queried whether there were any measures, other than the travel plan, that WBC or RBC could enact to alleviate potential highways issues. Judy Kelly stated that Reading Buses comments and suggestions had been passed on to the transport teams, and WBC would work with RBC regarding traffic issues.

 

Pauline Jorgensen stated that she was in support of WBC working alongside RBC to find a solution to congestion issues in this area. Pauline queried whether there would be any improvements to crossing facilities for school children. Judy Kelly stated that the travel plan would look at all journeys to and from school and identify potential improvements.

 

Carl Doran queried whether this application could be deferred until the travel plan had been submitted. Judy Kelly stated that the applicant had committed, and was conditioned, to work with WBC and submit a suitable travel plan in due course. Simon Weeks proposed that should the Committee be minded to approve this application, the final submitted travel plan could be signed off by the Chairman of the Planning Committee and a Shinfield North Ward Member. The Committee agreed to this in principal, and this was added as an additional Informative.

 

A number of Members voiced their opinion that it was a shame that the White Building could not be retained as part of this application. Jeanette Davey reiterated that many unsympathetic modifications had been made to the building over the years, and it would take a substantial investment to make the building fit for purpose.

 

Gary Cowan queried why the air quality assessment was to be carried out prior to occupation of the new school buildings. Jeanette Davey stated that environmental health had proposed that the assessment be carried out prior to occupation, however Officers could ask environmental health whether the proposal could be reworded. Gary Cowan queried whether ongoing monitoring of air quality could be included within the proposals. Jeanette Davey stated that she would liaise with environmental health regarding air quality monitoring.

 

RESOLVED That application number 191655 be approved, subject to Conditions and Informatives as set out in agenda pages 86 to 99, and the two additional Informatives as resolved by the Committee.

Supporting documents: