Agenda item

Demolition of former Durham Johnston School, Whinney Hill and the erection of 75 no. dwellings with associated infrastructure, landscaping and car parking.

The Senior Planning Officer, Chris Baxter, gave a detailed presentation on the report relating to the abovementioned planning application, a copy of which had been circulated (for copy see file of minutes).  Members noted that the written report was supplemented by a visual presentation which included photographs of the site.  The Senior Planning Officer advised that Members of the Committee had visited the site and were familiar with the location and setting.  The application was for demolition of former Durham Johnston School Whinney Hill and the erection of 75 no. dwellings with associated infrastructure, landscaping and car parking and was recommended for approval subject to conditions.

The Senior Planning Officer explained that there were a number of changes in terms of the conditions listed within the report, namely: to condition 2, with plans referring to Cragside amended to state “Cragside special”; to condition 4 to ensure a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) as in place within 6 months of a certificate of completion; and additional condition in terms of parking being in place; to remove condition 6; to condition 9 to reflect and updated Bat Survey; to condition 10 to require a statement in terms of archaeological work; and an additional condition as regards restricting all properties on site to C3, use as residential dwellings.  It was added that the stated financial contribution of 1% of the build cost was now to be an amount in the sum of £50,000.

The Senior Planning Officer referred Members to elevations, photographs, plans and aerial photographs and explained that there was ancient woodland to the east of the site and existing properties to the south.  It was explained that the site was within a Conservation Area and that there was a north and south access to the site, with it being proposed that a one-way system would be in place, vehicles entering the site from the north entrance, exiting via the south.  The Senior Planning Officer added that proposed layout for the site was primarily dictated by the changing levels across the site, with a range of properties including detached, semi-detached, terraced and apartments, the apartments being at the lowest end of the site.  Members noted some elevations of properties showed split levels, to take into account the changes in level across the site. 

The Senior Planning Officer noted no objections from statutory consultees, with internal consultees being satisfied subject to additional information, as set out within the conditions.  It was noted there were 2 letters of representation, from the City of Durham Trust and the Whinney Hill Community Group, as set out within the report.

The Senior Planning Officer explained that the site was brownfield, in a sustainable location, separation distances were acceptable, the design was acceptable and there had been no objections from the Highways Section in terms of the scheme.  Members noted that there would be affordable housing on site and a contribution towards open space and public art and the recommendation was for the Committee to be minded to approve the application, subject to a Legal Agreement, the conditions set out within the report and the amended conditions and additional condition as mentioned.

The Chairman thanked the Planning Officer and asked Mr A McVickers of Persimmon Homes, the applicant, to speak in relation to the Application.

Mr A McVickers thanked the Chairman as noted that the site was the most sustainable site available and the proposed development was in line with the saved City of Durham Local Plan.  Members noted the services and transport links available within the City, with bus stops on the main road running alongside the site.  It was added that the mixed development of houses and apartments would help to meet demands for properties and it was explained that the applicant had sought early discussions with Planning Officers at the pre-application stage, building upon the work undertaken in terms of the site of the former Police Headquarters.  Mr A McVickers explained that the design was of a new character; however, this was such to preserve or enhance the Conservation Area, working with the levels of the land as mentioned by the Senior Planning Officer.  Mr A McVickers reiterated as regards public spaces and the retention of many trees on the site and that a suite of accompanying reports linked to the application had been submitted, including relating to: heritage; transport; flood risk; and archaeology.

Mr A McVickers explained that a Section 106 Agreement would secure 20% affordable housing and contributions in terms of green space, public art, education and rights of way in the area.  It was added that concerns raised by local residents pre-application as regards parking and possible use as house in multiple occupation were addressed in the proposed TRO and the restriction of use to Class C3, alongside the Article 4 Direction that was in place.  Mr A McVickers also noted there would be an estate covenant in place preventing use of the properties for student housing.  It was added that there was housing lag and that it could not be demonstrated that the area could meet a 5 year supply of housing and therefore the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) noted that in such cases there should be presumption to grant permission.  Mr A McVickers noted that site surveys had not highlighted any technical reasons for any further revisions to the scheme and that as the development presented no detriment he asked the Committee to support the Officers recommendation and approve the application.

The Chairman noted with some sadness the loss of the school, however recognised the site had been vacant and an application had been brought forward.  The Chairman asked Members of the Committee for their questions and comments on the application.

Councillor D Freeman explained that 33 years ago he would have been sat in a class at the Durham Johnson School and noted that he would not have thought he would be sitting years later on a Committee considering the demolition of the building, noting “that was anarchy for you”.  Councillor D Freeman noted that the site was one of the, if not the, last sites within the city for C3 not C4 use.  He added that the proposals were in line with the development brief for the site and the site had been empty for the last 10 years.  Councillor D Freeman added that he could not praise the application enough, the Section 106 Agreement and the associated contributions and also the one-way system in terms of access.  Accordingly, Councillor D Freeman noted he formally proposed the application be approved, subject to the Legal Agreement, conditions as set out and amendments as explained by the Senior Planning Officer.

Councillor B Moir noted that when his father attended the School in 1933 he would not have thought his son would be at a Committee considering such an application.  Councillor B Moir noted that it looked as if the place would be a splendid place to live, and while it was sad to see the loss of the school building itself, the application was welcome.

Councillor A Bell asked as regards the 20% affordable housing and whether this would be of rent or sale and how this would affect the marketing of these properties.

Councillor J Lethbridge noted there had been some discussions as regards the old school and he could not disagree with the sentiment, indeed there was a tinge of sadness noting many areas within Durham that were being knocked down, demolishing history.  Councillor J Lethbridge noted he supported the recommendation of the Officer and was pleased to note the retention of some trees, and noted the proximity to an Iron Age site and ancient woodland adding that we should value these things that we have.  Councillor J Lethbridge concluded by noting that the restriction in terms of C3 use was very welcome.

The Senior Planning Officer noted that is set out at paragraph 83 of the report that 10 units would be at affordable rent, with 5 discount market sale units.

Mr A McVickers noted the financial contribution would be £315,215 towards education. The Senior Planning Officer agreed that the financial contribution towards education would be £315,215

Councillor D Freeman moved that the application be approved; he was seconded by Councillor B Moir.

RESOLVED

That the Committee was MINDED TO APPROVE the application, subject to the completion of a Section 106 Legal Agreement and the conditions detailed in the Officer’s report to the Committee, subject to the amendments and additional condition as described by the Senior Planning Officer.