School allotment change at St Josephs Primary School, Clydebank

What was proposed

The application sought to remove “community” from a condition covering allotments at the primary school.

“DC25/119/FUL: Application under Section 42 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended) for the variation of condition 12 of planning permission DC23/098/FUL to remove reference to "community" from allotments at St Joseph’s Primary School, Faifley Road, Clydebank by West Dunbartonshire Council.”

Officer report

The site and its setting

The site contains the primary school and grounds, with residential properties and open space around its boundaries.

“To the north of the site lies the former janitor’s house once associated with the school, beyond which there is an area of open space bounded from the north by Faifley Rd which curves and continues west at this point. The north-western perimeter is alongside the area of greenspace which continues in the southern direction along Abbeylands Rd to join Knowes Woodlands.”

Officer report

Earlier permission and construction

An earlier permission approved a new educational and community campus, including a community allotment area, and construction had started.

“The various facilities would be contained within a single new building to be constructed to the south west of the existing school building and the development will include associated parking, sports facilities and landscaping. A small community allotment area was also proposed as part of the development adjacent to Faifley Road. Development has commenced on site. Work commenced on the development in February 2024 and is ongoing.”

Officer report

Why officers supported the change

The proposed school use was considered suitable, maintained by the Council, and unlikely to harm the development, local area or residential amenity.

“The condition ensured that an appropriate approach for the management and operation of the allotment area was agreed. The applicant advises that it has been determined that the proposed community allotment area is too small to accommodate a meaningful community allotment area like that found at Skypoint.”

“This change would potentially result in a minor decrease in the overall impact of the development on the wider neighbourhood, with no or very limited activity within the allotments taking place outwith the school hours, as opposed to community allotments which could be visited by their users from within the community in late afternoon and early evening hours.”

Officer report

Objections and consultation

No consultees were listed, while one objection raised concerns about trees, privacy, screening and the access road.

“3.4The applicant advises that it is proposed for the space originally allocated to the community allotments to instead be used as educational space where pupils of the adjacent school campus would be able to engage in growing their own plants and crops, thus supporting the school curriculum and the promoting environmental awareness among children.”

“The full details are contained within the planning file and are available for public viewing however the concerns raised can be summarised as follows: • Tree planting proposals as part of the development may adversely impact upon neighbouring property. • The height of the access road may adversely impact upon the privacy of neighbouring property and additional screening may be necessary. 5.2These concerns will be considered in the appraisal below. Page 12”

Officer report

Who spoke

A representative of Faifley Community Council spoke against the application, and the applicant’s representative spoke in support.

The committee’s debate

Members considered the application and heard further explanations from planning, development management and legal officers before proposing approval or refusal.

“After discussion and having heard the Planning, Building Standards and Environmental Health Manager, the Development Management Team Leader and the Legal Officer in further explanation and in answer to Members’ questions, Councillor Dickson, seconded by Councillor Singh Johal, moved that the Committee agree to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions set out in paragraph 9 of Appendix 1 of the report.”

“As an amendment Councillor O’Neill, seconded by Councillor Hennebry, moved that the Committee agree to refuse the Planning Application, as the ‘Community’ element of the site should remain in place.”

Minutes

The vote and decision

The vote was tied, so the Chair used a casting vote to approve the amendment and refuse the application.

“On a vote being taken, 4 Members voted for the amendment and 4 for the motion. There being an equality of votes, Councillor O’Neill, Chair, exercised his casting vote in favour of the amendment which was accordingly declared carried.”

Minutes