Agenda item
Central Foundation School, Harley Grove & 41-47 Bow Road, London
Decision:
Update Report Tabled.
Councillor Ann Jackson proposed an amendment, seconded by Councillor Carli Harper Penman, “That a condition be added that details of refuse servicing for the school be submitted in writing to the Council with a view to ensuring refuse servicing takes place on site”. On being put to the vote, the amendment was declared carried.
On a vote of 2 for and 0 against with 1 abstention the Committee RESOLVED
(1) That planning permission, listed building consent and conservation area consent for the redevelopment of the school, including the following matters, be GRANTED subject to the conditions and informative set out in the report.
Redevelopment of the school including:
- Use of 41 – 47 Bow Road as a sixth form college.
- Demolition of a number of buildings, included locally listed St Antony’s building.
- Erection of building up to four storeys in height adjacent to the grade 11 listed building on Bow Road.
- Remodelling and refurbishment of existing buildings being retained.
- Installation of two glazed lifts to D&T block.
(2) That a further condition be added as follows:
That details of refuse servicing for the school be submitted in writing to the Council with a view to ensuring refuse servicing takes place on site.
It was noted that Councillor Eaton could not vote on this item as she had not been present at the beginning of the item.
Minutes:
Update Report Tabled.
Mr Pete Smith (Development Control Manager, Development and Renewal) introduced the application regarding the Central Foundation School, Harley Grove & 41-47 Bow Road, London
The Chair invited statements from persons who had previously registered to address the Committee.
Ms Pat Smith stated that she was speaking on behalf of residents of Coborn Street. She relayed their concerns at the waste collection arrangements and the removal of the parking bays. She reported that at present waste was collected on site at 7am in the morning when nobody was there with the vehicles reversing in. This present system worked well and should be preserved.
Four parking bays would be lost. Would alternatives spaces be found? The area was very congested during term time already. It would be especially busy during construction time. Where would the constructions vehicles park?
She expressed concern at the plans to put refuse bins on the street and that it would obstruct the pavement. How would children get round this when visiting the school?
In summary the refuse collection should still be done out of school hours and the site should have more parking bays.
Ms Isobel Cattermole (Corporate Director, Children Schools and Families) spoke in support of the application. The school was a popular, voluntary aided non denominational school. The school provided a wide training agenda for both children and teachers.
She explained the profile of the school (including a balanced BME student base, the percentage of school meals provided). Whilst attainment was good, the site was less good and in need of renovation. So the funding from government was to renovate the site.
She briefly explain the key elements of the scheme, located over two sites, including the redevelopment of 41-47 Bow Road site to provide a sixth form block, the provision of a new building and refurbishment of existing buildings. The Trustees had purchased 41- 47 Bow Road to redevelop the sixth form block. The block and the college terrace would be managed by the Trustees once the project had been completed.
At present there was poor circulation, little connectivity with the wider community. The Applicant was sympathetic to the objections and the comments of English Heritage, addressing many of them by amending the scheme. In relation to the concerns around refuse collection and parking, Ann Canning, Service Head for Learning and Achievement, would be working with Officers to identify ways to mitigate the concerns.
Ms Ila Robertson (Applications Manager, Development and Renewal) presented the report. She described in detail the proposed works including:
- Provision of the new six form college (L-Block);
- Renovations to the grade II listed building (A Block);
- Demolition of a number of listed buildings including St Anthony’s House;
- The erection of a new building in place of St Anthony’s House (B&C Blocks) extending along Coburn Street;
- Works to existing buildings (D&T Blocks).
She addressed the main planning matters around the demolition of the listed buildings. The buildings were of little heritage value given the number of alterations that had already occurred to them. Furthermore, given the location of them on site it would be difficult to retain them and provide the new facilities for the school.
Overall it was considered that the loss of the historic assets was considered appropriate given the considerable public benefits that the new facilities would bring to improve the learning environment of students, and the new buildings would improve the character of the area and would also facilitate better interaction between the school and the community. As a result of this, it was justifiable on policy grounds.
The works to the listed buildings were conditioned as set out in the Officer report and the update report. The works to the Design and Technology blocks were modest. Any further changes to the historic status of these buildings following the listing request would require a further listed building consent so this was a safeguard.
Officers circulated images of the proposal showing views from the street scene.
The site had an excellent Public Transport Accessibility rating. The travel survey indicated that most of the trips to the school would be on foot. In relation to the waste collection arrangements, Highways were dissatisfied with the reverse manoeuvres for collection, and were recommending the system be changed. Accordingly, parking bays would be removed to facilitate the new servicing systems. Officers clarified the location of these spaces. The Construction Management Plan was subject to agreement with Environmental Health and Highways Officers. The scheme would also have no adverse impacts on the amenity of neighbouring properties.
Overall the scheme would provide much needed educational improvements for the Borough. The public benefits far outweighed any harm and therefore should be approved.
In response, Members raised the following issues:
- That the net loss of car parking spaces be confirmed.
- Expressed concerns about existing parking congestion in Coborn Street and requested that Officers look into the feasibility of changing the Pay and Display bays to residential bays.
- The historic value of the St Antony’s Building.
- Whether the community benefits could still be secured without its removal?
- Sought assurances that the views of English Heritage in the update report were up to date.
- The choice of colours for the exterior. Reasons for the lack of uniformity.
- The merits of changing the refuse servicing arrangements.
- Members questioned why the existing on site system needed to be changed as it worked already. It was asked whether this could be reviewed to save the loss of parking spaces?
In response, Ms Robertson reported the following issues –
- There would be a net loss of four parking spaces. The equivalent of eight metres on each street. (Coborn Street and Harley Grove)
- Any requests to change the parking bays would need to be referred to Community Localities and Culture, who managed such services, and subject to public consultation. Officers were happy to report the Committee’s views around redesignating the bays to the Parking Services Department.
- Consideration could be given to retaining the on site refuse system by a suitably worded condition.
- The reasons why St Antony's House was not considered worthy of statutory listing due to the number of the alterations and lack of historic features remaining.
- It was considered that the loss of the building was appropriate given the public benefit the improvements would bring. There was no chance such facilities could be provided without its removal. It would also enable a better relationship between the school and the community by an improved streetscene.
- The views of English Heritage regarding the building were as set out in the report. The comments in the update report related to the request to list Block T.
- Reasons for the choice of colour, designed to complement the listed buildings and create a modern appearance.
Accordingly Councillor Ann Jackson proposed an amendment, seconded by Councillor Carli Harper Penman, “That a condition be added that details of refuse servicing for the school be submitted in writing to the Council with a view to ensuring refuse servicing takes place on site”. On being put to the vote, the amendment was declared carried.
On a vote of 2 for and 0 against with 1 abstention the Committee RESOLVED
(1) That planning permission, listed building consent and conservation area consent for the redevelopment of the school, including the following matters, be GRANTED subject to the conditions and informative set out in the report.
Redevelopment of the school including:
- Use of 41 – 47 Bow Road as a sixth form college.
- Demolition of a number of buildings, included locally listed St Antony’s building.
- Erection of building up to four storeys in height adjacent to the grade 11 listed building on Bow Road.
- Remodelling and refurbishment of existing buildings being retained.
- Installation of two glazed lifts to D&T block.
(2) That a further condition be added as follows:
That details of refuse servicing for the school be submitted in writing to the Council with a view to ensuring refuse servicing takes place on site.
It was noted that Councillor Eaton could not vote on this item as she had not been present at the beginning of the item.
Supporting documents: