Agenda item

To erect a new single storey extension to form 3no. classrooms at Saxilby C Of E Primary School, Highfield Road, Saxilby - 138681


(NOTE: Councillors H Spratt and N H Pepper left the meeting)


Dennis Shepherd, an objector, commented as follows:-


·       The construction of three classrooms would lead to a rise in both teaching staff and children. Please see the Governors Autumn Report.

·       There was no mention made in the application of any additional car parking spaces being created on the school site to cope with the already exhausted parking.

·       There were currently over 40 people working in the school. Many others attended on a part time basis. There were currently 22 parking spaces on the school premises. The report spoke of 24 people or staff driving to work, this was incorrect.

·       Living close to a school one expects that in the mornings and afternoons for half an hour or so there were going to be parents dropping off and picking up children. There were already between 10 and 16 cars parked all day, every school day, on the road side. Many were parked on bends, opposite driveways, partially on the pavement, etc. (See the tabled sketch showing where the main problems were).

·       Residents, none of whom parked on the road but on their drives, had to struggle and manoeuver to either get off or on to their drives.

·       The Police, PCSO’s and Traffic Wardens rarely walked past the school and seemed to be disinterested in taking any action on parking infringements.

·       When large vehicles, refuse lorries, supermarket delivery vans and the school bus, etc, tried to pass they drove onto the verges. The grass verges were permanently churned up. Both the Parish Council and Highways had repaired and reseeded them on a number of occasions but it was a complete waste of time and tax payer’s money as they were just as bad within days.

·       Highfield Road was the narrowest estate road in the village yet people had all these parked vehicles to negotiate.

·       A constant worry was in the ability of emergency vehicles to reach properties particularly in Elm Close where there were special needs children living.

·       Saxilby was having an additional 300+ houses built, no doubt some of these would be purchased by families with young children requiring school places.

·       Mention had been made in the report of a Travel Plan and car sharing. As staff lived in many different areas this was very unlikely to make any significant difference.

·       Also mentioned was the fact that 41% of children walked to school. This figure was disputed as I can count how many children were walking past my window both morning and afternoon on one hand. The vast majority were dropped off by car around 08.00 for “breakfast club, delivered and collected by their parents at normal start and leaving times or collected up to 18.00 from “after school club”.

·       Our estate roads were being blocked, we were being severely inconvenienced and the roads were being made hazardous by people attending the school site for whatever reason. Did we have to have an accident, involving a child, like the one in Lincoln last Wednesday, before any action was taken?


No questions were asked of Dennis Shepherd.


Catherine Stratton, representing the applicant, commented as follows:-


·       Currently had 342 children in school, 3-11 years old. These numbers had risen steadily over the past 4 years through growing reputation and increased numbers of primary aged children in the area – an increase of 58 children since September 2014.

·       More recently, the Local Authority had identified a sufficiency issue with the school’s current capacity and had planned to increase our Pupil Admission Numbers from 50 to 60 for one bulge year – a planned increase of just 10 children in September 2019. They had also identified a need to replace one of the temporary, mobile classrooms for a longer term solution.

·   The three new proposed classrooms were needed and the extended space would transform the daily life in school.

·       Firstly, the new extended space would accommodate a class which was currently taught in an increased unsuitable mobile classroom, disjointed from the school and an increasing drain on resources to maintain. The school needed a long term solution to accommodate these children. A fluid teaching approach across year groups was ran which allowed the school to be flexible and met the needs of different children in different ways.

·       Secondly, a staffroom for the staff was unable to be used before and after school.  It was the only space that could be used to run the wrap around care provision, an essential facility for parents within the village and an excellent way to spread the arrival and departure of children from the usual peak times. The school had recently taken over the running of Kids Club and now had over 70 children registered.

·       There was nowhere suitable to hold staff meetings and training sessions and the school was extremely limited for professional work spaces throughout the day, e.g. there was a very high number of children with additional needs, many of which, worked with outside agencies. It was unacceptable that these children, who needed it, had their speech and language sessions in the main entrance space of the school. It was highly unsuitable that parents met with our Family Support Worker in a room that was also accessed through my office. A suitable, flexible work space for staff and children would transform things for everyone.

·       The new expansion would allow us to provide staff with a designated space for a staffroom. This would move into an existing classroom in the school and the new build would also accommodate the displaced class from the current school building. It was unacceptable that the school's hardworking staff did not have a staffroom available to them before and after school, including no rest room facilities apart from two rest rooms for visitors.


There were no questions asked of Catherine Stratton.


Comments by members included:-


·   The proposed new building would bring positive improvements for the school.

·   The parking issues were noted but there was no big increase in traffic.

·   The school had a good arrangement with the Parish Council which allowed parents to park at their offices located near to the school to drop and pick children up.

·   It was noted that more houses were to be built in the village which could lead to increased traffic problems in the future.

·   Residents should be asked to contact the enforcement authorities if they were experiencing parking problems.


On a motion by Councillor T R Ashton, seconded by Councillor P A Skinner, it was –


RESOLVED (unanimous)


That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report.




















Supporting documents:



Original Text: