Retrospective Planning Application for the Alterations to the

Document Sample
Retrospective Planning Application for the Alterations to the Powered By Docstoc
					Retrospective Planning
Application for the Alterations to
the Former Girls High School,
Richmond


Planning, Design and Access
Statement
Retrospective Planning Application for
the Alterations to the Former Girls High
School, Richmond


Planning, Design and Access Statement




August 2009


Notice
This report was produced by Atkins for North Yorkshire County Council for the specific purpose of a planning
design and access statement to support a planning application for the proposed amendments to the Former
Girls High School, Richmond School, Richmond.

This report may not be used by any person other than North Yorkshire County Council without their express
permission. In any event, Atkins accepts no liability for any costs, liabilities or losses arising as a result of
the use of or reliance upon the contents of this report by any person other than North Yorkshire County
Council.


Document History

JOB NUMBER: 5044576                                       DOCUMENT REF: Planning, Design and Access
                                                          Statement




V002        Final for issue                 EW            RB              PS             DR          September
                                                                                                     09

V001        Draft for internal review       EW            MB              RB             MS          August 09


5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc
Revision         Purpose Description        Originated   Checked   Reviewed   Authoris   Date
                                                                                ed




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc
Planning, Design and Access Statement




Contents
Section                                                                        Page
1.       Introduction                                                             4
         Background                                                               4
         Purpose of Retrospective Application                                     4
         Content of Statement                                                     5
2.       Site and surroundings                                                    7
3.       Context to the Application                                               9
4.       Planning Policy                                                         14
         Introduction                                                            14
         National Planning Policy Context                                        14
         The Statutory Development Plan                                          15
5.       Planning Considerations                                                 17
         Introduction                                                            17
6.       Conclusions                                                             23




Appendices
Appendix A                                                                       24
A.1      Current condition of building (Extract from Conservation Statement)     25
Appendix B                                                                       32
B.1      Photographs of Pre - Construction and Post Construction Works.          33
Appendix C                                                                       43
C.1      Historical Window Analysis                                              45
Appendix D                                                                       48
D.1      Written Correspondence with English Heritage                            49
Appendix E                                                                       60
E.1      Floor Plans                                                             61
E.2      Elevations                                                              62
E.3      Classroom Sections                                                      63




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                         3
Planning, Design and Access Statement




1.          Introduction
1.1         This statement (the “Statement”) has been prepared on behalf of the Children and Young Peoples
            Services (CYPS) of North Yorkshire County Council (NYCC). It supports a retrospective
            application for planning permission for alterations to the Former Girls High School (the ‘Listed
            Building’) at Richmond School, Darlington Road, Richmond. The application site (“the Site”) is
            located within the grounds of Richmond School, Darlington Road, Richmond. The site is identified
            in red on the Site plan (drawing number A4101). A retrospective listed building application for the
            works has been submitted to NYCC to be considered alongside this application.

            Background
1.2         The application forms part of the wider proposals for the redevelopment of Richmond School
            under the Building Schools for the Future programme (BSF), funded by DCSF. The Richmond
            School site benefits from a number of extant planning permissions, the most significant being a
            scheme for the redevelopment of the buildings and sports facilities (Application
            NY/2006/0387/FUL), which was granted consent in May 2007 (‘the Consented Scheme’). The
            Listed Building Consent (LBC) was simultaneously obtained for the alterations to the Listed
            Building as part of the overall re-development proposals. The Consented Scheme is now being
            part implemented in respect of alterations to the Listed Building, and construction of a new sports
            hall (which together comprise ‘Phase 1 works’). A further planning application for the
            redevelopment of the remaining elements of the school (comprising ‘Phase 2 works’) has been
            approved by NYCC and is currently being considered by Government Office for Yorkshire and
            Humber.

            Purpose of Retrospective Application
1.3         Discrete elements of the Consented Scheme are being implemented for the Phase 1 works
            including the sensitive refurbishment of the main Listed Building block along with the removal of
            later built additions. This has involved further research in direct liaison with English Heritage to
            establish the original condition and finite details of the early years of the building. As such the
            design has been progressed having been informed by this research process. The progression of
            the designs from that approved under the Consented Scheme has resulted in a number of minor
            amendments to the scheme, which has subsequently been implemented and which now form the
            basis of this application.
1.4         The broad thrust of the scheme remains the same as the original application; the key differences
            are selective demolition of later alterations and extensions; the incorporation of new build
            additions; and the sensitive reinstatement of original architectural character and detail. The
            alterations are sympathetic to the character and significance of the listed building, and seek to
            reverse earlier less-sympathetic interventions, returning the building to its original plan form.
            These minor alterations are detailed more fully in section 3 of this Statement.
1.5         The purpose of this retrospective planning application is, therefore, to regularise the position
            regarding the amendments associated with the Listed Building at Richmond School. The planning
            application is accompanied by an application for Listed Building Consent (LBC). Following
            guidance from NYCC Planning Officer the LBC seeks permission for those amendments to the
            Consented Scheme that have not previously been approved under the original Listed Building
            Consent which accompanied the Consented Scheme. This is detailed further in the next section.




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                          4
Planning, Design and Access Statement




1.6         This Statement describes the minor design amendments to the Listed Building and demonstrates
            how they remain consistent with planning policy. This Statement also demonstrates why NYCC
            should grant planning permission for the retrospective works.
1.7         The Site falls within the County of North Yorkshire and the District of Richmondshire. The
            application has been submitted to North Yorkshire County Council (NYCC) under the provisions of
            Regulation 3 of the Town and Country Planning (General Regulations) 1992, which states:
                  “An application for planning permission by an interested planning authority to develop any
                  land of that authority, or by an interested planning authority jointly with any other person,
                  shall be determined by the authority concerned, unless the application is referred to the
                  Secretary of State under section 77 of the 1990 Act”

            Content of Statement
1.8         In planning terms, the ‘principle’ of the redevelopment of the Listed Building and re-use as part of
            the wider redevelopment proposals for the school was established following the grant of planning
            permission for the Consented Scheme during 2007 and, therefore, this is not considered further in
            this Statement. The Statement describes the minor design changes compared to the Consented
            Scheme and demonstrates how these changes do not fundamentally change the purpose or
            character of the scheme and meets the purposes of the original consent.
1.9         This Statement comprises 6 sections. Following this introduction, Section 2 provides a description
            of the Site and its surroundings. Section 3 details the development which has been undertaken
            on site and clearly explains how this differs from the Consented Scheme. Section 4 of this
            statement outlines the key planning policies whilst section 5 provides the planning considerations
            along with an assessment of how the proposals comply with relevant planning policies. The
            conclusions are contained within Section 6. Supporting information is provided in the Appendices
            as follows:
            •    Appendix A provides a detailed description of the condition of the building prior to work
                 commencing (extract taken from the Conservation Statement to accompany the Consented
                 Scheme);
            •    Appendix B provides a number of non technical, illustrative photos of the Listed Building in its
                 original condition and then following the redevelopment works;
            •    Appendix C provides the historical window analysis; whilst
            •    Appendix D provides written correspondence from English Heritage on amendments to the
                 scheme in respect of discharging conditions on the Listed Building Consent.
            •    Appendix E provides the approved drawings from the Consented Scheme for the Listed
                 Building.
1.10        This Statement describes the proposal in detail and explains the principles that have been used in
            progressing the detailed design and subsequent amendments to the Consented Scheme for the
            redevelopment of the listed building, as required to be submitted as part of a Design and Access
            Statement. The guidance provided by CABE in “Design & Access Statements, how to write, read
            & use them”(CABE 2006) Department of Communities and Local Government Circular 01/2006
            “Guidance on changes to the development control system” (DCEG June 2006) article 4C of the
            General Development Procedure Order 1995 as amended, have all been taken into consideration
            in the preparation of this Statement.
1.11        For the purposes of the application for Listed Building Consent this Statement provides the detail
            as required for the ‘Heritage Statement’ to comply with the Council Validation Checklist. This is
            detailed further in section 5 of this report.
1.12        In addition to this Statement, as agreed with the Council’s planning officer, Mike Convery, the
            application comprises the following documentation:
5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                         5
Planning, Design and Access Statement




            •    Copies of the planning application forms and certificates;
            •    Location plan reference A4101;
            •    Existing site plan- reference A4102;
            •    As built site plan – reference A4100;
            •    Original Floor Plans (prior to consented scheme) A4200 Rev 01;
            •    As built floor plans A4201 rev 03;
            •    Original roof plan (prior to consented scheme) A4200a;
            •    As built roof plan A4202;
            •    Original elevations (prior to consented scheme) A4300 rev 02;
            •    As built elevations A4301 rev 02;
            •    Typical sections A4401 rev 02;
            •    Window detail A4402;
            •    Photographs of the building (prior to works and post completion)




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                           6
Planning, Design and Access Statement




2.          Site and surroundings
            Site and Surroundings
2.1         The Site is located in the north west corner of Richmond School, adjacent to The Crescent and
            The Avenue. The Site area is illustrated on drawing A4101 and incorporates the former Girls High
            School building (the Listed Building) and the adjoining courtyard area.
2.2         Vehicular access to the Site is taken from the existing entrance point to the school site on
            Darlington Road via an internal access road. An additional second vehicular access is taken from
            the south west of the building via The Crescent. Pedestrian access is via internal school footpaths
            from the main school block and from The Crescent.
2.3         To the west and north of the Listed Building is hardstanding associated with the overspill car park
            area, existing school buildings and the main vehicular exit onto Darlington Road. The south and
            east of the building is bound by a small linear strip of mature trees beyond which is the basket ball
            courts and further south the terraced landscape forming the playing fields. Residential properties
            form the west and south west boundary of the School site.
2.4         Beyond the boundary of Richmond School are a number of established residential
            neighbourhoods, the closest of which are those to the north of Darlington Road, and those to the
            west around The Crescent and The Avenue. The neighbourhoods typically contain properties
            between one and two storeys in height. The Site description is detailed more fully in Appendix A.
            Landscape and Views
2.5         As with much of Richmond School’s grounds, from the south of the Site beyond the Listed
            Building there are south easterly aspects towards open countryside, with long distance views of
            the Cleveland Hills and the North York Moors. Views of the site from the west are restricted in the
            main by natural screening provided on the school boundary and garden boundary of residential
            properties along The Avenue and The Crescent. To the north there are only partial views of the
            Site from Darlington Road due to the presence of the existing Youth Club and Design Technology
            Block.

            Former Girls High School
2.6         The former Girls’ High School is a Grade II Listed building built in c.1939 to the designs of
            architect Denis Clarke Hall. The building is of great historical significance for the groundbreaking
            design which was to prove hugely influential on educational architecture for much of the 20th
            Century. The design was based on the need for even light and ventilation throughout, along with
            the acoustic isolation of classrooms and study areas. The building provides a rare piece of well
            preserved 1930’s Modern architecture in the north of England, complete with its original
            landscaped setting.
2.7         The building plan comprises a “spine” corridor running north-east to south-west, off which all
            rooms and facilities are accessed. The east of the corridor comprises the classroom pavilions,
            staff facilities and library. To the west are the assembly hall, kitchen, practical, physical, and
            playground facilities. At the south end of the corridor is the Entrance Hall, Staff Room and staff
            facilities, and first floor Library. Two wings are set to the west of the corridor. The first directly off
            the Entrance contains the Assembly Hall, the second the Cloakrooms and former Housecraft
            Room. At the opposite (north) end of the building a further wing to the west links to the former
            Gymnasium. The courtyard is enclosed by the former Cloakroom/Housecraft wing to the south,
            the main, “spine,” corridor to the east and the former Gymnasium wing to the north. A further
            detailed description of the building is contained in Appendix A of this Statement.
2.8         A Conservation Statement was submitted in support of the Consented Scheme. It identified that
            overall the building is considered to be in fair condition. “The level of general maintenance has

5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                                7
Planning, Design and Access Statement




            been good, although 50 years of continued educational use has inevitably led to wear and tear,
            particularly to the interior”.
2.9         The Conservation Statement also identified that the later repairs and maintenance works tended
            to be functional in character and had not necessarily respected the design quality and attention to
            detail of the original building:

            ‘As is typical with many school buildings, the former Girls High School has had a series of
            additions and alterations undertaken during the 1960’s and 1970’s, many of which had little regard
            for the architectural composition of the original building, and has resulted in destructive and
            unsympathetic interventions into the original fabric’
2.10        An extract from the Conservation Statement detailing the condition of the building prior to Phase 1
            works on the Consented Scheme is provided in Appendix A of this report.
2.11        The Consented Scheme and subsequent works undertaken to the building have sought to
            address the later additions highlighted in the Conservation Statement, in order to restore the
            building to its former state. The works which have been undertaken are detailed in the next
            section.




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                         8
Planning, Design and Access Statement




3.          Context to the Application
            Consented Scheme
3.1         Phase 1 of the Consented Scheme sought to address the effects of previous unsympathetic
            interventions to the original fabric of the building which have been undertaken over time at the
            school (as detailed in the Conservation Statement and Appendix A). This included the removal of
            the later built additions to the Listed Building and the sensitive reinstatement of original architectural
            character and detail of the main school building, in order to ensure the building is able to function
            in its intended use.
3.2         The Consented Scheme was accompanied by a Listed Building Consent (LBC) which included a
            number of conditions, one of which required the finite design of the building to be submitted for
            approval. The purpose of this was to allow for further detailed drawings to be progressed, as the
            approved LBC application drawings were schematic in character, illustrating the overall form of the
            proposed development. This is reflected in the wording of Condition 3 which states:

            ‘Prior to the commencement of the development hereby authorised full drawn details of the
            alterations to the former Girls High School shall be submitted to and approved by in writing by the
            County Planning Authority. Work shall thenceforth be undertaken in strict accordance with the
            details hereby approved’
3.3         The Consented Scheme included a number of internal alterations to classroom and corridor
            layouts to mirror the original design aspirations of Dennis Clarke Hall. Externally the fenestration
            was to be refurbished to restore the original design and materials proposed by Dennis Clarke Hall
            along with other alterations to the building elevations. The courtyard areas were to be reverted
            back to a general external outside amenity area by the removal of car parking, refurbishment of
            some areas of the original surface treatment that had fallen into disrepair and additional planting
            to provide amenity benefit.

            Proposed Alterations to the Consented Scheme
3.4         Following the grant of planning permission for the Consented Scheme, on-going discussions have
            been held with English Heritage pursuant to discharging Condition 3 on the LBC. As a
            consequence, further historical research has been undertaken which has provided clarification of
            the original features and finite design detail of the Listed Building.
3.5         The minor amendments to the Consented Scheme that form the basis of this application have
            been developed to take into account the new information acquired through this process. This has
            enabled the restoration to be undertaken in a manner which accurately reflects the original
            composition of the building. Whilst the broad thrust of the refurbishment has remained the same
            as the Consented Scheme, the detailed design now fully reflects the latest understanding of the
            historical context of the building and the resultant minor amendments reflect this evolution of
            knowledge. The amendments also allow the modernisation of the building to bring it back into
            fully functional use for the school.
3.6         This planning application seeks retrospective consent for the retention of the minor amendments
            to the Listed Building. An application for Listed Building Consent (LBC) accompanies the planning
            application. The LBC seeks permission for amendments to the Listed Building which have been
            undertaken in addition to those works that have been approved in pursuant of condition 3 of the
            LBC for the Consented Scheme. Those amendments as listed below that form part of this LBC
            are detailed in the corresponding text from paragraph 3.10 onwards.
            •    Installation of roof lights to the North West elevation;
            •    Installation of ventilation unit to the North West elevation;

5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                            9
Planning, Design and Access Statement




            •    Development of inner courtyard W/C area;
            •    Internal alterations to toilet area;
            •    Demolition of office (Room 266);
            •    Amendment to the proportion of the seminar room;
3.7         A photographic record of the Listed Building and the wider site was undertaken, prior to the
            commencement of any redevelopment works on the Site. Subsequent photographic evidence has
            been collected to demonstrate the current built form, in order to illustrate the extent of alterations
            which form the basis of this retrospective application, in order to demonstrate the positive impact
            these present to the built form of the Listed Building. Where appropriate these photographs have
            been used to demonstrate each of the amendments and are contained in Appendix B.
3.8         In terms of amendments to the Consented Scheme, these can be summarised as follows:
            •    Amendments to fenestration and doors;
            •    Amendments to the elevational treatment;
            •    Addition of plant and roof lights;
            •    Design detail for the courtyard elevations;
            •    Small areas of demolition; and
            •    Minor internal design alterations.
3.9         Each of these amendments is considered in detail below.

            Amendments to Fenestration and Doors
3.10        The majority of amendments that form the basis of this planning application concern the
            positioning and detailed design of the windows and doors. A historical window analysis was
            undertaken to inform the Consented Scheme (contained in Appendix C of this statement). This
            identified that the original windows on the south east single storey block of the Listed Building
            have previously been entirely replaced with galvanised steel, along with all north-west facing
            windows to the single storey classrooms, those in the former gym and those on the south west
            side of the hall block. The ground floor windows on the two storey range (south-east elevation)
            have also changed subtly in design. The Consented Scheme sought to replace the galvanised
            steel windows with new white coated steel windows in a design to be agreed with English Heritage
            as part of the detail required to discharge condition 3 of the LBC.
3.11        The historical window analysis has continued to be updated as further information on the condition
            of the original building has been established, to ensure that the correct and most appropriate
            designs, and choice of material, are used. Discussions have taken place with English Heritage
            over a significant period of time to gain agreement on the final scheme design (as detailed in
            Appendix D) and this research has been used as the basis for the final construction detail which
            has been implemented.
3.12        In relation to each elevation, the following specific design amendments have been undertaken:

            North East Elevation
            •    Former Art Room – the Consented Scheme illustrated the window openings to be retained as
                 existing. However, subsequent historic research has shown that the window opening on the
                 north wall of the former Art Room was originally much smaller, comprising of a high level
                 clerestory only. The window openings that have now been reinstated revert back to this
                 original design form. A large dossier of supporting information including drawn and
                 photographic evidence was submitted to English Heritage pursuant to Condition 3 of the


5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                       10
Planning, Design and Access Statement




                 LBC, which was subsequently approved on 4th December 2007. This is documented in
                 Appendix D of this statement.
            •    New Build Area – the random rubble external stone wall proposed in the Consented Scheme
                 on the adjacent buildings along this elevation has been extended on to the new build section
                 of the elevation, replacing in part the glazing panels originally proposed, in order to present a
                 consistent built form. Along with the new stonework, additional new framed double glazing
                 units have been incorporated into this elevation to reflect the new window openings
                 constructed on the former Art room, as approved by English Heritage.

                 Plate 1 provides an illustration of the elevation prior to construction commencing and
                 following completion of the building.

            South West Elevation
            •    Roof Screen - the Consented Scheme positioned a 1940’s replica roof screen on the roof
                 terrace, the details of which were to be agreed through condition on the LBC. Dennis Clarke
                 Hall’s original screen would have comprised a brick or clay block structure which would have
                 been demolished when the later extension was built over the roof terrace. The replica roof
                 screen has now been repositioned on the opposite wall and rebuilt using double layer of
                 100mm light weight blockwork, with external finish of Sto render. The existing railings have
                 been removed, and the 1940’s original style railings replaced with tubular hand rail and
                 square support posts with galvanised finish and aluminium infill panels.
            •    Secondary Entrance - The existing timber doors and windows on the entrance block have
                 been removed and replaced with new hardwood double glazed timber units in a style to
                 replicate original 1940’s design.

                 Plate 2 indicates the south west elevation prior to construction commencing and
                 following completion of the building.

            South East Elevation
            •    Fenestration – the windows onto the individual courtyards of pavilion blocks have been
                 replaced following guidance from the window analysis undertaken with English Heritage.
                 Configuration of the replica windows for the Office and Latin classroom has been amended
                 following historical review of photographs and consultation with English Heritage.
            •    The terrace adjacent to the two storey block on the south east elevation has had a new
                 external surface of concrete paving slabs to revert this area back to original design. The
                 existing windows have been replaced with a new replica door on the terrace following
                 historical review of photographs and consultation with English heritage.


                 Plate 3 provides an illustration of the elevation prior to construction commencing and
                 following completion of the building.

            North West Elevation Inner Courtyard Northern Area
            •    Entrance Points from main school block – doors to the 6th form study area, bistro and
                 entrance hall have been slightly repositioned on this elevation compared to the Consented
                 Scheme. Existing openings in the wall of the former gym (now the 6th form study area) have
                 been built to matching rubble stonework. This is due to the demolition of a later extension to
                 the old gym, which created a void which was then rebuilt in stone. The previous arrangement
                 only had a single door, whereas there are now 2 pairs of double doors. This is illustrated on
                 plan A4301 rev 02.



5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                       11
Planning, Design and Access Statement




                 Plate 4 provides an illustration of the elevation prior to construction commencing and
                 following completion of the building.

            North West Elevation Inner Courtyard Southern Area
            •    This elevation was not shown on the approved details of the Consented Scheme and has
                 been developed following discussions with English Heritage. The original cloakrooms in this
                 wing were accessed directly from the playground via a covered walkway. The covered way
                 was enclosed post 1973 by a wall, thereby forming an internal corridor. The concept of
                 remodelling this elevation has been discussed on site with English Heritage who has been
                 broadly supportive of the principle. The existing 1973 elevation is not in sympathy with
                 architectural character of the building and conceals the original screen wall to the
                 cloakrooms. The works which are the subject of this planning application have introduced a
                 glazed curtain wall which allows the original elevation to be viewed. Whilst English Heritage
                 have indicated their support in principle (as detailed in email of 13th May 2008 contained in
                 Appendix D) as this amendment did not form part of the original LBC, it therefore forms part
                 of the LBC which accompanies this planning application.
            •    Doors and windows – the entrance points on the south side of the courtyard area proposed
                 under the Consented Scheme have been repositioned. Equally the doors providing access
                 to the remodelled area have been repositioned. The design of the doors themselves has
                 been revised from folding doors to double doors to reflect the design of the other new
                 interventions on the building. On the first floor the configuration of replica windows has been
                 amended from that consented following historical review of photographs and consultation
                 with English Heritage.
            •    Roof Lights – 4.No roof lights were originally proposed with the Consented Scheme. In order
                 to increase natural daylight and ventilation into the internal dance/performing arts area 8.No
                 roof lights have been added. The roof lights (as shown on the south-east and north-west
                 elevation) will not be visible to the eye from ground level when viewing the building from the
                 south-east as the roof line is set back beyond the spine corridor. Given that the rooflights
                 extend to about 400mm above the flat roof due to their construction, they are only visible
                 from the inner courtyard. The amendments to the rooflights did not form part of the original
                 Listed Building Consent for the Consented Scheme and therefore forms part of the LBC
                 which accompanies this planning application.
            •    A mechanical ventilation unit has been constructed on the assembly hall roof at allow air
                 conditioning into the building. The plant sits at a height of approximately 2.5m from roof
                 height. The location of plant has been determined by the need to provide ventilation to
                 internal rooms in the building particularly the internal toilets, wash areas and classrooms
                 which have no natural ventilation. The plant will sit adjacent to the 8.No. roof lights which are
                 present on this elevation. This is considered further in section 5 of this statement. The
                 installation of a ventilation unit did not form part of the original Listed Building Consent for the
                 Consented Scheme and therefore forms part of the LBC which accompanies this planning
                 application.

                 Plate 5 provides an illustration of the elevation prior to construction commencing and
                 following completion of the building.

            Amendments to floor plan
3.13        In terms of the changes to the built footprint, the following minor amendments have been
            undertaken, as illustrated on Drawing No. A4201 rev03 (Floor Plans):
            •    Opening up the roof terrace area above the south west entrance. One additional area of
                 demolition has been undertaken on the first floor of the south west block next to new
                 performing arts area. This area was not part of the original 1940’s design and is a later

5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                          12
Planning, Design and Access Statement




                 addition. Following discussions with English Heritage it was agreed this should be
                 demolished to restore the building back to its former condition.
            •    Demolition of small room (room 266 office) of approximately 16m². It was always an intention
                 of the scheme to demolish this building but this was not previously illustrated on the drawings
                 submitted for the Consented Scheme. This area is an extension to the original 1939 building
                 and agreement was reached with English Heritage to demolish this in order to reinstate
                 original view from entrance hall. English Heritage has always been supportive of the
                 demolition of this c.1969 addition as it blocks the original view out from the Foyer to the
                 distant hills. This is also acknowledged in the Conservation Statement submitted to support
                 the Consented Scheme. This amendment did not form part of the original LBC and therefore
                 forms part of the LBC which accompanies this planning application.
            •    Classroom 2 (leisure and tourism) – the line of plinth has been omitted following further
                 investigations which identified that the plinth did not originally exist. A door in the new
                 partition subdividing the science lab to form 2No. classrooms included in the Consented
                 Scheme has also been repositioned as part of the amendments.
            •    Toilet / cloakroom area. The original character of the cloakroom area has been reinstated,
                 however to accommodate the number of WCs needed to meet current legislative
                 requirements, a minor alteration to the Consented Scheme in respect of the layout of the WC
                 area has been implemented. This amendment did not form part of the original LBC and
                 therefore forms part of the LBC which accompanies this planning application.
            •    Seminar Room: This area is a new build infill on the Consented Scheme. The proportions of
                 this new build section have been amended slightly to meet the requirements of the school.
                 This amendment did not form part of the original LBC and therefore forms part of the LBC
                 which accompanies this planning application.
3.14        Other issues:

            Landscape
3.15        A scheme for the landscaping of the whole school site was required by condition on the
            Consented Scheme. A full set of landscaping details for the site which includes the hard and soft
            works proposed for the courtyard area, pavilion courtyards and external grounds around the
            entrance has been submitted to and approved in writing by NYCC in order to discharge Condition
            4 on the Consented Scheme. This has since been implemented in accordance with these details.
3.16        The remaining sections of this Statement demonstrate how the minor amendments that have been
            undertaken on the Site reflect the principles of planning policy.




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                      13
Planning, Design and Access Statement




4.          Planning Policy
            Introduction
4.1         This section provides a brief overview of the planning policy context within which this application
            falls to be determined at national, regional and local level. In so doing, it demonstrates the
            planning policy rationale for the proposals. The Planning and Compulsory Act 2004 (the 2004
            Act) requires that planning applications should be determined in accordance with the development
            plan unless material circumstances indicate otherwise. The 2004 Act changed the plan-making
            system in England and Wales, replacing the previous system of Structure and Local Plans with
            Regional Spatial Strategies (RSS) and Local Development Frameworks (LDF). The latter will
            eventually become the ‘development plan’ for the purposes of the 2004 Act. This statement
            identifies those planning policies contained within the development plans produced under both the
            old and new systems that are considered relevant to this application.

            National Planning Policy Context
4.2         Government planning policy is set out in the form of Planning Policy Statements (PPS) and
            Planning Policy Guidance Notes (PPG). The latter are in the process of being replaced by the
            former. The main aspect of national planning policy considered to be most relevant to this
            application is Planning Policy Guidance Note 15: Planning and the Historic Environment.

            Planning Policy Guidance Note 15: Planning and the Historic Environment
            (September 1994)
4.3         The advice contained in PPG15 deals with planning and the historic environment. Its overriding
            purpose is to balance the economic viability of the re-use of historic buildings against the effect of
            any changes they entail on the special architectural and historic interests of the building. In all
            cases it encourages the sympathetic redevelopment of historic buildings.
4.4         Paragraph 2.14 considers the association between historic and modern development,
            recommending that old buildings are not set apart, but are woven into the fabric of the living and
            working community. In designing new buildings which respect their setting a range of design criteria
            should be considered including scale, height, massing and alignment, and use appropriate materials. In
            particular it notes that:

            ‘This does not mean that new buildings have to copy their older neighbours in detail: some of the most
            interesting streets in our towns and villages include a variety of building styles, materials, and forms of
            construction, of many different periods, but together forming a harmonious group’
4.5         Paragraph 3.13 considers the impact of accommodating additional works to listed buildings
            ‘….. Some listed buildings are the subject of successive applications for alteration or extension: in
            such cases it needs to be borne in mind that minor works of indifferent quality, which may seem
            individually of little importance, can cumulatively be very destructive of a building's special
            interest’.
4.6         In considering the effects of alterations to Listed Buildings PPG15 states that it is essential to have
            assessed the elements that make up the special interest of the building in question and includes
            such matters as the spaces, layout and technical features of interest on the building.
4.7         The guidance confirms that section 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation) Act
            1999, requires Local Authorities, in assessing the impact on the setting of a listed building, to have
            special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of architectural
            or historic interest which it possesses. It confirms that the setting of a listed building is often an
            essential part of the building’s character especially if a garden or grounds have been laid out to
            complement its design or function. If the setting of listed buildings becomes isolated from its

5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                             14
Planning, Design and Access Statement




            surroundings by new traffic routes and car parks for example, the economic viability and the character
            of the building may be lost.
            Emerging consultation paper on a new Planning Policy Statement 15: Planning for the
            Historic Environment
4.8         The government is in the process of consulting on a new combined planning policy statement on
            the historic environment which replaces PPG15 and PPG16. The consultation paper outlines the
            Government’s aims for heritage reform, which reflect a more modern, integrated approach to the
            historic environment. It defines the historic environment in terms of heritage assets to be
            conserved and, where appropriate, enhanced in accordance with a set of common principles in
            proportion to their significance (defined in terms of historic, archaeological, architectural or artistic
            interest). The new PPS makes clear that we should focus on what is significant in heritage terms
            about a place and not just protect all of it for its own sake.
4.9         A range of principles are established in this consultation PPS, including the need to weight the
            public benefits of the proposed development against any harm it has on the heritage asset. This
            consultation document is still at an early stage and as such the weight that can be afforded to this
            document is limited however it provides guidance on the approach of planning policy in the future.

            The Statutory Development Plan
4.10        The Development Plan for the Site comprises:
            •    The Regional Spatial Strategy for Yorkshire and Humberside (RSS) to 2016;
            •    Richmondshire District Local Plan (1996-2006)The relevant regional and local planning
                 policies are as follows:


4.11        Policy EVN9 of the RSS provides guidance on issues relating to the historic environment, aiming
            to safeguard and enhance, and ensure that historic context informs decisions on development and
            regeneration. Provision for the protection, management regeneration and enhancement of those
            areas, sites and buildings should be given where possible.

            Richmondshire District Local Plan (1996-2006)
4.12        The Richmondshire Local Plan (adopted September 2001), together with the RSS forms the
            Development Plan for the Site. Under the Planning and Compensation Act 2004, policies from the
            Local Plan can be saved until the emerging Local Development Framework is adopted. The
            Secretary of State direction dated September 2007 outlines which policies from the 2001 Local
            Plan will be saved. The main policies considered of relevance to the consideration of this
            planning application are outlined below:


            Policy 1: The Basis for Development Control
4.13        Policy 1 establishes the basis by which Planning Applications are to be determined and identifies
            a number of other factors that need to be considered in the decision making process. These
            include the need to consider the effect on neighbours and local amenity in new development.
4.14        The Local Plan contained a number of policies relating to the protection and redevelopment of
            Listed Buildings, and more general policies on the enhancement of cultural assets. These policies
            have not been saved by the Council and as such any planning policy guidance in respect of listed
            buildings is provided at a national level from PPG15 and the emerging PPS.
            Policy 5: Design in the Countryside
4.15        Policy 5 provides design guidance in rural areas. Whilst the Site is not within a rural location, in
            the absence of any other design policies, the general principles of this policy are a consideration
            in this scheme.
5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                           15
Planning, Design and Access Statement




            ‘When new development takes place in the countryside, buildings and their surroundings should
            emulate the quality and character of vernacular buildings in the locality. Where this is not possible
            because of problems of size, or where uses of land are concerned, other techniques should be
            used to achieve the best possible design standard. There may be scope for other non-vernacular
            design approaches, but when proposals of this kind are put forward they should be accompanied
            by special justification in the form of a supporting design statement’.




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                      16
Planning, Design and Access Statement




5.          Planning Considerations
            Introduction
5.1         Section 38 (c) of the 2004 Act confirms that planning applications should be determined in
            accordance with the development plan unless material circumstances indicate otherwise. In this
            section, the planning and design considerations raised by the minor amendments which have
            been undertaken to the Listed Building are outlined, and each is assessed against the
            development plan policies and against national policy guidance. Any other material
            considerations that should be taken into account in the determination of this planning application
            are identified. The commentary is structured around key issues relating to design and access
            considerations, with due consideration given to the main impacts associated with the minor
            amendments proposed in this application, which are considered to be:
            •    Impact on the cultural heritage of the Site;
            •    Landscape and visual impact;
            •    Impact on residential amenity;
5.2         A range of environmental assessments accompanied the Consented Scheme. To ensure the
            impact of the changes to the Listed Building have been considered in a robust manner,
            environmental specialists have been approached to advise where there is a degree of impact as a
            result of the minor amendments to the scheme. Where necessary these impacts are outlined and
            assessed.

            Scale and Layout
5.3         The further research undertaken with English Heritage has clarified the precise scale and layout of
            the original buildings. The subsequent amendments that have been undertaken have used this
            research to ensure the scale and layout of the building reflects the original designs of Dennis
            Clarke Hall. The amendments that have been undertaken largely retained the scale and massing
            of the existing building, comprising subtle amendments to the fenestration and doors elevations
            on the building. Whilst there have been some small adjustments to the building footprint and
            layout, these amendments were largely undertaken to reflect the original designs, or else to allow
            modernisation of the building to bring it into fully functional use. The additional detail for the inner
            courtyard not previously illustrated on the Consented Scheme has been developed in direct
            dialogue with English Heritage. The amendments to the built footprint have not compromised the
            design objectives established by Dennis Clarke Hall. The unique pavilions and courtyard area
            which were central features of the original design are all retained in full.
5.4         The extent of the amendments are not out of keeping with the scale or character of the building
            and have helped to bring the building design back to its original state. The amendments are
            therefore considered to reflect the principles of PPG15 and the emerging PPS15 consultation
            document.

            Appearance
5.5         In terms of the appearance of the Listed Building, the amendments that have been undertaken
            continue to respond directly to the original designs of Dennis Clarke Hall and represent
            improvements to the quality and appearance of the principle elevations. Pursuant to discharging
            Condition 3 of the LBC, the finite designs including the elevational treatment of the building and a
            historical window and door analysis were established. The alterations that have been undertaken
            reflect this research.
5.6         Section 3 of this statement explains the materials that have been used on each amendment. The
            sensitive use of high quality materials has been retained and adopted throughout the building,

5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                         17
Planning, Design and Access Statement




            providing unity between the original, restored and new build elements of the scheme allowing
            each to blend sensitively with the surrounding area and integrate carefully with original features.
            The amendments to the new build elements have utilised a similar pallet of materials to minimise
            the visual impact of the building from the surrounding area and reflect the design concepts
            adopted for the main building. Accordingly, the amendments are in conformity with Policies 1 and
            5 of the Richmondshire District Local Plan and the requirements of PPG15.

            Impact on Cultural Heritage
5.7         PPG15 sets out the likely range of issues that should be considered in planning applications
            affecting listed buildings. These issues include:
            •    the importance of the building, its intrinsic architectural and historic interest and rarity, in both
                 national and local terms;
            •    the particular physical features of the building (which may include its design, plan, materials
                 or location) which justify its inclusion in the list;
            •    the building's setting and its contribution to the local scene;
            •    the extent to which the proposed works would bring substantial benefits for the community.
5.8         Equally the Validation Checklist set out by North Yorkshire County Council requires the
            submission of a Heritage Statement to accompany any application for Listed Building Consent.
            The guidelines provided by the Council in terms of the scope of the Heritage Statement reflect the
            requirements of PPG15 with consideration given to the following:
                  i)         the special architectural or historic interest of the building and a justification of the
                             proposed works;

                  ii)        the particular physical features of the building that justify its designation as a Listed
                             Building; and,

                  iii)       the setting of the building.

                  Where demolition of the whole or any substantial part of the building is proposed, the
                  Statement should also justify the need for demolition having regard to:

                       •   The condition of the building, the cost of repairing and maintaining it in relation to its
                           importance and to the value derived from its continued use;

                       •   Efforts made to retain the building in use; and,

                       •   The merits of alternative proposals for the site.

                       •   Street scene or perspective elevations where significant extensions are proposed on
                           public elevations.

                       •   Photographs/photomontages of all affected elevations and details.

                       •   Structural survey where the application proposes demolition or significant alterations to
                           the structure of the building.

5.9         Consideration of this detail is provided in the remainder of this section. In addition, to inform this
            understanding, appropriate extracts have been provided in Appendix A from the Conservation
            Statement which was undertaken for the Consented Scheme. Appendix A provides more detail
            on the historical significance of the building; the particular physical features of the building that
            justify its designation as a Listed Building; and the condition of the building and issues associated
            with its redevelopment.


5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                                18
Planning, Design and Access Statement




            Progression of design detail from the Consented Scheme
5.10        The Conservation Statement undertook a detailed appraisal of the value of the Listed Building and
            identified that a number of later alterations has been undertaken without due regard for the
            architectural composition of the original building…’and have resulted in destructive and
            unsympathetic interventions into the original fabric’. The refurbishment of the Listed Building has
            been informed by this assessment and English Heritage has been integral to this process,
            providing advice on the detailed features as they have been developed throughout the progress of
            the works.
5.11        As such the amendments which have been undertaken seek to achieve the same aims as the
            Consented Scheme but reflect a more advanced understanding of the original architectural
            character and detail of the building.

            Assessment of the amendments against PPG15
5.12        The minor amendments that have been undertaken allow the efficient modernisation of the
            building. In particular the amendments that have been undertaken to the layout of the building
            provide more useable teaching and operational spaces which enable the building to function as it
            was originally intended, whilst ensuring the continued survival of this recognised important school
            design. This follows the recommendations of PPG15, paragraph 3.10 which states:

            ‘The best use will very often be the use for which the building was originally designed, and the
            continuation or reinstatement of that use should certainly be the first option when the future of a
            building is considered’
5.13        PPG15 acknowledges that many Listed Buildings can sustain some degree of sensitive alteration
            or extension to accommodate continuing or new uses but continued moderate alterations can
            affect the quality and character of the building ‘….. Some listed buildings are the subject of
            successive applications for alteration or extension: in such cases it needs to be borne in mind that
            minor works of indifferent quality, which may seem individually of little importance, can
            cumulatively be very destructive of a building's special interest’. (paragraph 3.13)
5.14        The selective demolition and refurbishment which is detailed in Section 3 of this statement has
            sought to reverse these earlier interventions to reflect the original building floor plan and follow the
            design principles contained in the Conservation Statement. This includes the staff office to the
            north of the entrance hall over the south-most terrace which the Conservation Statement
            considered to have been ‘undertaken in an insensitive manner relative to the architectural
            composition of the building’.
5.15        PPG15 acknowledges that it is necessary to accept a degree of change to provide for modern
            educational needs if the building is to have a sustainable future as an educational facility. The
            areas of new build or redevelopment meet the modern needs of the school whilst complimenting
            Dennis Clarke Hall’s earlier design aspirations. The amendments undertaken add to the cultural
            value of the building as the layout and nature of elevations are now a clear reflection of Dennis
            Clarke Hall’s original architectural design and have been developed in close liaison with English
            Heritage. In this respect the amendments accord with the requirements of PPG15.

            Impact of roof plant
5.16        Policy 7 of the Conservation Statement acknowledges that there may be conflicts which arise
            between the need to conserve the character of the existing building and the need to install
            environmental services to allow the building to function. The addition of plant to the roof of the
            Listed Building will offer some moderate visual impact specifically for views from the Courtyard
            area. Views from all other elevations will be largely screened by existing buildings or due to the
            wider Site topography.


5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                         19
Planning, Design and Access Statement




5.17        PPG15 advises that in considering the effects of alterations to Listed Buildings ‘it is essential to
            have assessed the elements that make up the special interest of the building in question’ and
            includes such matters as the spaces, layout and technical features of interest on the building. The
            emerging PPS15 consultation document further advises that the public benefits of the proposed
            development should be weighed against any harm caused (Paragraph 9.7) and ‘material harm
            should not be accepted unless it is necessary in order to sustain the asset in its original use….’
            (Paragraph 9.8)
5.18        The plant is required to provide the necessary ventilation to the classrooms to enable the building
            to be fully functional and used to its potential. It is required to fulfil operational standards of the
            building in providing ventilation to internal rooms including toilets and washrooms which do not
            benefit from other sources of natural ventilation. The air handling unit meets the minimum fresh
            air requirements of Part F of the Building Regulations and BB87. The size of the unit is required to
            allow the incorporation of a heat recouperator section which reclaims the heat from the return air
            and introduces it into the supply air and meets the requirements of Part L2 of the Building
            Regulations. The unit has been sized only to serve the individual classrooms concerned with its
            minimum fresh air requirement and the size of the unit cannot be reduced on that basis. The
            choice of location for plant has been restricted by operational requirements as the unit needed to
            be installed on a flat roof close to the classrooms. The original chosen location for the plant was
            further back into the roof area, but due to structural implications on the existing roof, was relocated
            to its current position.
5.19        The plant would have a limited impact on the courtyard affecting views of the inner courtyard area
            and south wing. Given its position close to other infrastructure on the roof including the roof lights
            the impact on the setting of the Listed Building is likely to be less significant. The impact of the
            plant could be lessened by mitigation such as the treatment of the external finish to ensure an
            appropriate colour is used, which could be secured through planning condition.
5.20        It is considered that there is allowance made within PPG15 for the provision of such plant, in order
            to facilitate the effective modernisation of the building. There are clear benefits to the provision of
            plant in this particular location and any moderate visual impact caused by the plant is necessary in
            order to sustain the building in its original use. This meets the principles of planning policy.
            Furthermore the plant would not harm the elements that make up the special interest of the listed
            building, which is a key requirement of PPG15. The building still retains the original features that
            Dennis Clarke Hall used to achieve his design aspirations and the addition of plant on the roof
            does not detract from this.
5.21        Therefore any moderate impact on the character and appearance of the Listed Building is isolated
            to the area around the courtyard and is justified in order to allow the building to function to its full
            potential in the use for which it was originally intended. Furthermore the visual impact can be
            mitigated further through careful colouring and screening, which can be secured by planning
            condition.
5.22        Overall it is considered that the minor alterations achieved through the scheme reflect a subtle
            design progression which has emerged following historical research and which more appropriately
            reflect Dennis Clarke Hall’s original architectural concepts. This accords with PPG15, the overall
            approach of the Local Plan and meets the requirements of the Conservation Statement.

            Landscape and Visual Impact
5.23        The Landscape Impact Assessment and Strategy which accompanied the Consented Scheme
            assessed impact of the scheme on the landscape quality and key views from sensitive receptors.
            It identified that the setting of the Listed Building would be greatly improved by the sensitive
            refurbishment of the Listed Building and the reinstatement of discordant external spaces that
            surround the building.



5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                         20
Planning, Design and Access Statement




5.24        In terms of visual impact, the subtle amendments that have been undertaken to the Listed
            Building are largely sympathetic to the overall character and setting of the Listed Building and
            bring the building closer to its original form and appearance. The amendments that have been
            undertaken mainly comprise subtle changes to the finite detail of the building. These
            amendments are not visible from key views identified in the Landscape and Impact Assessment
            including Darlington Road and south to Cross Lanes due to the distance from the Site, the subtle
            nature of the amendments and the presence of existing buildings in the surrounding area.
            Therefore, there is no resultant detrimental visual impact on key views to the Site from sensitive
            receptors. On the contrary, the amendments offer an improvement in the overall appearance and
            quality of the building.
5.25        The development of detail on the southern block of the inner courtyard and amendments to the
            new build ‘bistro’ area has a positive visual impact on the immediate vicinity of the Site and
            surrounding buildings. The careful detailing of the designs and the use of high quality materials
            reflect the original character of the building and offers an overall improvement in the appearance
            of this courtyard area in the immediate vicinity of the Site (as illustrated in Plates 4b and 5b in
            Appendix B). These amendments are not visible from key views on Darlington Road and Cross
            Lanes.
5.26        Plate 5b contained in Appendix B of this report illustrates the mechanical plant that has been
            located on the southern building of the inner courtyard. In terms of visual impact on closest
            residential properties at The Crescent and The Avenue, the plant is largely screened by a two
            storey building which sits directly between the plant and the western school boundary. There are
            slight views of the surface of the plant as it extends marginally beyond the rooftop of this two
            storey block; however this is not visible from selected properties at The Crescent and The Avenue
            due to the presence of mature trees that sit at significant height on the school boundary and
            vegetative garden boundary of the properties. Any long distance views from sensitive receptors
            on Darlington Road and to the south beyond Cross Lane are limited due to the terraced
            topography of the land stepping down away from the building to the south. Views from these
            positions are partially broken by existing buildings, structures and vegetation in the school
            grounds in the sight line of the plant, and any remaining views are not significant given the size of
            the plant in relation to the wider built environment of the school and distance to receptors. Equally
            the visual impact of the plant to the east of the Site is minimal as the plant is largely screened by
            the ‘Bistro’ area.
5.27        The most significant visual impact from the plant is on the immediate courtyard areas where the
            equipment is most visible from users of the school. The previous section of this chapter explains
            the special circumstances which justify the siting of the plant in this particular location and
            demonstrate why the operational requirements of the Site mean that no other less visible location
            can be used. Whilst there is some localised visual impact for the immediate users of the Site
            surrounding the courtyard area, it is considered that this limited impact is offset by the operational
            daily benefits provided to the users of the school building. Equally the principle pedestrian access
            into the building is routed away from this area, allowing only views from users moving between the
            building and the car park area. It may be possible to minimise any visual impact through
            appropriate colouring of the equipment to reflect the surroundings built environment or screening
            which can be secured through appropriate conditions. The impact of the plant on the setting of
            the listed building and the justification for the use of this plant is considered separately above.
5.28        The analysis above demonstrates the moderate visual impact of the design changes to the Listed
            Building. The design and appearance of the Listed Building is considered to accord with the
            design principles identified in Local Plan Policy 5 and Policy 1 of the Richmondshire Local Plan.

            Residential Amenity
5.29        In terms of impact on residential amenity, the only anticipated impact from noise emissions
            associated with the amendments to the Consented Scheme is from the addition of roof lights on

5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                         21
Planning, Design and Access Statement




            the south west block of the building. Noise has the potential to leak from the roof lights above the
            performing arts area when they are open which may be noticeable near to the building especially
            if amplified music is present in the performing arts space.
5.30        Whilst no formal noise assessment has been undertaken in support of this planning application,
            advice taken from a specialist acoustic consultant considered that due to the distance to the
            nearest dwellings on The Crescent, any noise 'breaking out' of the roof lights would not cause any
            disturbance at these dwellings. Furthermore, it is anticipated that the school are likely to control
            the level of noise/music in the space so as not to disturb other adjacent teaching spaces in which
            case this will further reduce the likelihood of disturbance to nearby residents.
5.31        The visual impact of the plant on residential amenity is considered in the previous section of this
            chapter. No other changes are proposed to the use of the building or the operating hours and as
            such no additional impact on residential amenity is anticipated beyond any posed by the
            Consented Scheme. It is considered that this scheme accords with Policy 1 of Richmondshire
            Local Plan.

            Access
5.32        The amendments have not substantially altered patterns of movement to and from the building.
            The main pedestrian access point for school children using the Listed Building will be retained on
            each elevation, with some minor amendments to the precise location of the doors and entrance
            points to reflect the original building design. The other minor changes to access points e.g. fire
            doors outlined in Section 3 have not materially altered the Consented Scheme.
5.33        No amendments are proposed to the vehicular access routes or any cycle access and as such no
            further assessment is required on this aspect of the scheme.
            Other planning considerations
5.34        Technical specialists (covering disciplines such as ecology, transport, ground conditions and flood
            risk) who were involved in the preparation of environmental assessments for the Consented
            Scheme have been approached in respect of their assessments on the Consented Scheme and
            the impacts arising from this application. Each has confirmed that the amendments to the Listed
            Building would not warrant any further assessment of impact and would not alter the findings of
            their assessments.




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                      22
Planning, Design and Access Statement




6.          Conclusions
6.1         The amendments to the Listed Building outlined in this Statement represent minor departures from
            the Consented Scheme. The changes, which occurred following further understanding of the
            original character of the building, have brought additional benefits over and above those
            associated with the original Phase 1 application. The amendments to the approved scheme have
            been made following consultation with NYCC and close involvement of English Heritage.

6.2         The amendments which have been undertaken to the Listed Building offer improvements to the
            appearance and quality of the building. These amendments have been sensitively designed in
            order to improve the cultural value of the building and remove unsightly later additions to the
            building. In particular the amendments provide the following benefits:
            •    The amendments take the building back to its original form layout and appearance as
                 proposed by Dennis Clarke Hall;
            •    The minor amendments meet the design policies developed in the Conservation Statement
                 submitted for the Consented Scheme and meet the broad principles of PPG15.
            •    Furthermore there is support for the sensitive restoration of a listed building to facilitate long
                 term economic use in the emerging PPS15 consultation document.
            •    The scheme overall reflects subtle differences from the Consented Scheme and retains the
                 same aims that the redevelopment proposals sought to achieve.
            •    The amendments are required to enable the school to modernise and allow the building to be
                 fully functional in its intended use.
            •    The school are desirous of a flagship Sixth Form College which will attract students from
                 outside of the immediate Richmond area, the refurbished Listed building will significantly help
                 them realise this opportunity.
6.3         The objectives of the scheme is to provide an educational facility which can meet the needs of
            staff and students in delivering a modern curriculum, whilst simultaneously balancing the
            significances of the site, thereby ensuring the long term sustainability of the building in its original,
            continued and intended use. The minor amendments to this scheme enable these objectives to
            be achieved.
6.4         The Statement has demonstrated how the minor amendments to the Listed Building can be
            accommodated on the site without significant visual impact or adverse impact on residential
            amenity. Furthermore the changes that have been undertaken to the Listed Building are sensitive
            to the historical character of the building and do not provide significant impact on the setting of the
            building.
6.5         It has been demonstrated that the amendments comply with the relevant provisions of the
            Development plan, and, therefore, there are no sound planning reasons why retrospective
            planning permission for the minor amendments should not be granted.




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                          23
Planning, Design and Access Statement




                                            Appendix A
         Extracts from Conservation Statement




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                24
Planning, Design and Access Statement




A.1         Current condition of building
            Current Condition
A.1.1       In general terms the original school building is in fair condition. The level of general maintenance
            is good, although 50 years of continued educational use has inevitably led to wear and tear,
            particularly to the interior. It is unfortunate, however, that later repair and maintenance works have
            tended to be functional in character and have not necessarily respected the design quality and
            attention to detail of the original building.
            Roofs
A.1.2       The original flat roof construction comprised of 5 inch reinforced concrete and hollow tiles with 2
            inch cork insulation, three-ply bituminous felt covering, and white spar finish. The roofs have
            subsequently been recovered with a built-up roofing system comprising additional insulation,
            roofing felt and plastic eaves trim. As a consequence, the original slim clean lines of the roofscape
            have been obscured. Thermally, the roofs perform poorly with significant heat loss during the
            cooler months.
A.1.3       Original rainwater goods are of cast iron with downpipes strategically placed to avoid interruption
            to the clean lines of the building. With the reconfiguration of the roofs additional rainwater
            drainage has been installed, mostly in uPVC, with little thought to the disfiguring impact to the
            elevations. Future proposals should seek to give greater respect to the original design quality of
            the building.
            Walls
A.1.4       Areas of original masonry are becoming open jointed, particularly where subject to rainwater
            washing. The effects are worse at wall top level. Future repairs should include for sensitive
            repointing in lime mortar.
            Windows
A.1.5       Photographic and archive evidence indicates that the school was originally fenestrated with timber
            framed windows throughout. A significant number of these original windows survive most notably
            on the north wall of the Assembly Hall, the door onto the roof terrace from the former library
            (Room 354), on the west elevation of the 2-storey administration block (Rooms 272, 273, 354,
            355), and the clerestory on the east side of the “spine” corridor. This list is not exhaustive. It would
            appear from the photographic evidence that a significant number of the original windows were
            replaced with steel Crittal frames during the latter years of the 1960’s or early 1970’s. This would
            accord with the phase of alterations which took place when the school was remodelled and
            redeveloped to Comprehensive status. It would appear that the classroom pavilions were
            refenestrated at this time as were the east elevation of the 2-storey administration & library block,
            and the gymnasium. Also to be refenestrated were the south wall of the Assembly Hall, and the
            west elevation of the “spine” corridor; the glazing to these two areas is of a different pattern and
            may suggest a subsequent and later phase of refenestration.
A.1.6       Items for further consideration are as follows:
            •    The high level ventilation openings on the north elevation of the former housecraft room have
                 been blocked up. Consideration should be given to their repair.
            •    The Green Room windows have similarly been blocked up. Consideration should be given to
                 their repair.
            •    The former Art Room includes south facing circular clerestory windows. These have
                 regrettably been over-boarded and covered with roofing felt. Consideration should be given
                 to re-detailing of the roof covering and the reinstatement of the windows.



5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                         25
Planning, Design and Access Statement




            •    The remaining metal framed windows suffer poor draught-proofing and consideration may
                 need to be given to sensitively improving their performance.
            •    The classrooms suffer considerable heat gain during the summer months due to the large
                 areas of south-facing glazing. Consideration will need to be given to sensitive remedial
                 measures; this might include secondary internal glazing, the re-introduction of Venetian
                 blinds, or renewal of the windows with high performance narrow profile steel frame units with
                 solar control glazing.
            External Doors
A.1.7       The original glazed doors have been lost from both the main and playground entrances together
            with the original glazed and sliding doors from the gym and art room. One pair of external timber
            doors remain giving access from Room 354 (the former library) onto the roof terrace.
            Colour
A.1.8       The original external colour scheme has been lost. Reference to the Architectural Review of 1940
            describes the original colour palette. “The exterior concrete is painted in pale tones of grey, grey-
            pink and grey-blue which give a neutral effect from a distance.” Consideration should be given to
            the commissioning of an historical paint analysis to determine the location and hue of individual
            colours and ultimately to the reinstatement of the original colour scheme.
            Landscaping
A.1.9       The majority of the external hard and soft landscaping survives, although now in a mature and
            worn condition.
A.1.10      Items for further consideration are as follows:
            •    The original cobbles and paving to the south side of the building have been extensively
                 damaged by vehicular traffic, for which it was not designed. Original planting has become
                 over-mature with vegetation now obscuring the entrance hall and the curved screen wall to
                 the Caretaker’s Cottage. Consideration should be given the repair and restoration of this
                 important landscape setting and the proper management/exclusion of vehicles. The original
                 sinuous path on the east side of the building appears to have been lost, the entire area now
                 grassed. However, consideration should be given to further on site investigations to
                 determine if the path actually survives beneath the grass.
            •    The original large unit concrete paving survives in the yard north of the assembly hall.
            •    The original playground paving survives in-situ, although now much eroded. Close
                 examination reveals that the large unit concrete paving slabs had a red-coloured surface
                 finish. The playground is currently used for car parking and the paving is becoming worn and
                 damaged by traffic movements. Consideration needs to be given to the exclusion of vehicles
                 from this area.
            •    Paving to the terraces is similar to that of the playground. The majority of the original red
                 surface finish has weathered away.
            •    Original soft landscaping survives to the courtyards and should be retained.


            Main Entrance & Entrance Hall
A.1.11      The entrance canopy has been clad with lead, disrupting the clean lines of the original design. An
            in-situ concrete kerb has been cast against the original entrance step; the paving is worn. The
            original entrance doors have been lost and a cumbersome draught lobby added internally.




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                        26
Planning, Design and Access Statement




            Assembly Hall
A.1.12      The original feature sliding wall requires overhauling. The original colour scheme has been lost.
            Reference to the Architectural Review of 1940 describes the original colour palette. “The ceiling
            and back wall up to the door head are painted gorse yellow, the columns and beams are pale grey
            blue with soffits and holes of brick red, and the side panels between the windows are pale pink.”
            Consideration should be given to the commissioning of an historical paint analysis to determine
            the location and hue of individual colours and ultimately to the reinstatement of the original colour
            scheme.
A.1.13      The oak ply dado has been insensitively varnished; however, there is probably little that can be
            done about this without damaging the oak veneer.
            Staff Room & Facilities
A.1.14      The original feature cast concrete partition wall has suffered impact damage over the years.
            Consideration could be given to its careful repair. The original fixtures, fittings and details within
            the female staff cloakroom survive remarkably intact. It is imperative that these two rooms remain
            unaltered.
            Headmistress’ Office
A.1.15      Original built in cupboards and shelving survive as does a small free-standing timber and glass
            book stand. These are important surviving fittings and should be retained and carefully
            overhauled.
            Roof Terrace
A.1.16      The roof covering (asphalt) appears to have been renewed. The south balustrade survives
            although now altered with the replacement of the original concrete panels with vertical steel bars.
            One pair of original double doors survive, giving access from Room 354 onto the terrace. The
            adjacent doors have been insensitively renewed with an “off the shelf” standard timber pattern.
            When opportunity arises these should be replaced to the original pattern.
            Green Room
A.1.17      Items for further consideration are as follows:
            •    As mentioned above, the original north facing windows have been blocked up.
            •    There is evidence of rainwater penetration through the roof; wall finishes are peeling. This
                 should be investigated further.
            •    The original dressing table and mirrors survive on the north wall and should be retained.
            •    As no use is intended for the room, due to spiral staircase access, this room would provide
                 an opportunity to retain all fixtures and fittings, including period light switches, socket outlets,
                 etc.
            Art Room
A.1.18      Items for further consideration are as follows:
            •    The former clerestory windows, as discussed above, should be uncovered and reinstated.
            •    An original sink unit survives in the south-west corner of the room, complete with tiled splash
                 back. The unit is subject to heavy wear and tear with some of the original doors missing.
                 Consideration should be given to the sensitive repair of this original fitting.
            •    The adjacent store (Room 327) contains an original timber floor with margin and early,
                 although probably not original, fitted storage units.




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                           27
Planning, Design and Access Statement




            Internal Doors
A.1.19      Surviving internal doors are subject to heavy wear and tear. Efforts should be made to overhaul all
            original doors and ensure that original ironmongery is retained and if necessary replaced to the
            authentic pattern.
            Internal Floor Finishes
A.1.20      The original coloured concrete floor tiles survive throughout the building. These are an important
            feature of the building and should be retained. The tiles in the classroom corridors have been
            overlaid with carpet; should these be in good condition, they should ideally be left exposed to
            view. The tiles within the former walkways have been weathered but are otherwise in serviceable
            condition.


A.2         List Description

         IoE number: 322937
         Location: GIRLS' HIGH SCHOOL, THE CRESCENT (north side)
         RICHMOND, RICHMONDSHIRE, NORTH YORKSHIRE
         Photographer: N/A
         Date Photographed: N/A
         Date listed: 28 January 1971
         Date of last amendment: 28 January 1971
         Grade II

         1. THE CRESCENT
         1549 (North Side)
         Girls' High School
         NZ 1701 SE 4/260 28.1.7l.

         1. THE CRESCENT 1549 (North Side) Girls' High School NZ 1701 SE 4/260
         28.1.7l. II 2. 1938 to 39, by D Clarke-Hall. Extended layout. Reinforced
         concrete with rubble walling and rendered panels. Flat roof. Single
         storeyed glazed entrance hall with shaped canopy on thin column. Assembly
         Hall to West with kitchen behind and free-standing concrete flue, Two
         storeyed block to East with concrete staircase and library on upper floor.
         Spine corridor running North with spurs to paired classrooms running East,
         connected by pergolas. Gymnasium blocks to West. Additions to rear end on
         roof of entrance hall.




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                    28
Planning, Design and Access Statement




A.3         Historical Map




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc   29
1939

1957-69

1970-72

1973-84

Post 1984
Planning, Design and Access Statement




A.4          Architectural Significance of the Building
A.4.1       Architecturally, the Girls’ High School is of national significance. This is partly reflected in its
            Grade II listed designation. However, the lower grade of listing does not adequately reflect just
            how significant this building truly is. The fact that the building was listed in 1971, a mere 30 years
            after completion is of interest and serves to illustrate that the significance of the building was
            recognised relatively early. The building has not been re-surveyed since its original listing in 1971,
            and consideration should perhaps be given to this to ensure that its status is adequately
            recognised.
A.4.2       The school was built to the designs of the renowned specialist schools architect, Denis Clarke
            Hall. In 1937, having just qualified as an architect, he won a competition run by the progressive
            News Chronicle for an ideal secondary school. The winning design and accompanying report set
            new standards not only for school design but also for the emerging field of building science. Denis
            Clarke Hall was born in 1910 in Hornchurch, Essex. After an education at Bedales School, he
            went to King’s College London to study science where he was to “drop out” after the first year.
            With his interest in science and woodworking skills he was encouraged to study architecture and
            subsequently enrolled at the Architectural Association. His final year dissertation was on the uses
            of concrete, when he was tutored by the engineer, Ove Arup. After graduating from the AA, Clarke
            Hall worked for Clive Entwistle who introduced him to the Modern Architectural Research Group
            (MARS) who championed British modernism. In a move well ahead of the educational reforms of
            the 1940’s, North Riding Education Committee commissioned Clarke Hall to realise a version of
            his competition winning design in the Richmond Girls’ High School. It was to prove a rare example
            of 1930’s Modern architecture in northern England. Working with his former tutor Ove Arup, he
            combined the “modern” concrete construction with walls of local stone, resulting in a synthesis of
            modern and traditional elements. This synthesis of old and new is still highly influential in
            architectural design today. Between 1948 and 1973 Clarke Hall designed 27 schools for 11 local
            authorities, including many in North Yorkshire. The government adopted his principles of natural
            light as a requirement for all schools and Clarke Hall thus influenced all post-war school design. In
            addition to his school work, he designed a number of housing schemes, including Hornchurch,
            Egham, and Cranbrook, where his unique synthesis of architectural elements fused modern and
            traditional design in historic settings.
A.4.3       The architectural merit of the building has been made all the more valuable due to the fact that
            many of the original design features and details survive intact. The fact the building was placed on
            such a large site has meant that alterations have largely been additive with little in the way of
            demolitions. It was also fortuitous that the building was listed at a relatively early stage in its life.
A.4.4       The building was painstakingly detailed and well crafted, a significant factor in its state of
            preservation today. It is unfortunate, however, that later repair and maintenance works have
            tended to be functional and have not necessarily respected the design quality and attention to
            detail of the original building. Some elements clearly were not capable of surviving the rigours of
            the Yorkshire weather, such as the concrete entrance canopy, now clad with lead, and the original
            concrete balustrade to the roof terrace, now replaced with steel bars. On the whole, however, the
            building has survived remarkably well serving to illustrate that not all “Modern” architecture is
            short-lived.
A.4.5       In addition to the school building itself, the Caretaker’s Cottage and entrance onto The Crescent
            survive intact giving added value to this a surviving “complex” of buildings. The grounds retain
            their original landscape design as illustrated in the Architectural Review of July 1940, complete
            with concrete paths and cobbles to the south, the concrete paved playground to the west and the
            courtyards and terraces to the east. The principal interior spaces survive largely intact. It is
            acknowledged that some elements, fixtures and fittings are missing or altered such as the original
            cloakrooms, the kitchens, gymnasium and ancillary changing rooms. However, despite these

5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                          30
Planning, Design and Access Statement




            alterations, the majority of the internal spaces remain largely as planned with original features and
            fixings still evident. Of particular note are the tiled floors, variously coloured according to use or
            zone; the asymmetrical double doors with their associated ironmongery; the sliding partition to the
            Assembly Hall; the classroom dais’; the stile-less door within the female staff cloakroom; the
            feature corrugated shuttered wall within the staff room; the asymmetrical door surrounds; the
            paving to the terraces with its bevel edge detail; the rainwater downpipes strategically placed to
            avoid interruption to the otherwise clean lines of the building; the concrete supports for the terrace
            pergolas; the architectural expression of contiguous materials as inter-related planes. The building
            is valuable as it has managed to retain its use as a school since its opening in 1940. This
            longevity of original purpose gives it historic standing in the context of its site and development.




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                       31
Planning, Design and Access Statement




                                            Appendix B
                        Photographs of the Building




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                32
Planning, Design and Access Statement




B.1         Photographs of Pre - Construction and Post Construction
            condition of building (where available).

B.1.1       Plate 1a: North East Elevation post works.




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                             33
Planning, Design and Access Statement




B.1.2       Plate 2a: Original south west elevation - entrance




B.1.3       Plate 2b: South West elevation post works




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                        34
Planning, Design and Access Statement




B.1.4       Plate 3a: Original south-east elevation prior to works commencing.




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                        35
Planning, Design and Access Statement




B.1.5       Plate 3b: South East Elevation Post Works




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc               36
Planning, Design and Access Statement




B.1.6       Plate 4a: Original North West Elevation showing North Wing and Gym




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                        37
Planning, Design and Access Statement




B.1.7       Plate 4b: North West inner courtyard North Wing Post Works




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                38
Planning, Design and Access Statement




B.1.8       Plate 5: North West inner courtyard South Wing Post Works




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                               39
Planning, Design and Access Statement




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc   40
Planning, Design and Access Statement




B.1.9       Plate 5d: Long Corridor/Courtyard Post Works




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                  41
Planning, Design and Access Statement




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc   42
Planning, Design and Access Statement




                                            Appendix C
                         Historical Window Analysis




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                43
Planning, Design and Access Statement




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc   44
Planning, Design and Access Statement




C.1         Historical Window Analysis




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc   45
Planning, Design and Access Statement




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc   46
RICHMOND SCHOOL
6th Form Centre
Listed Building Window Analysis
13.12.2007
Planning, Design and Access Statement




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc   47
Planning, Design and Access Statement




                                            Appendix D
  Written Correspondence – English Heritage




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                48
Planning, Design and Access Statement




D.1         Written Correspondence with English Heritage

       December 2007


       Mr Erik Matthews
       North Yorkshire County Council
       Development and Countryside Service
       County Hall
       Northallerton
       North Yorkshire
       DL7 8AH                                                      Our ref: L00041069
                                                                    4 December 2007


       Dear Mr Matthews

       RICHMOND SCHOOL, DARLINGTON ROAD, RICHMOND, RICHMOND,
       RICHMONDSHIRE, NORTH YORKSHIRE, DL10 7BA

       I am writing following our site meeting on 15th November to discuss the most recent
       amendments to the application and in particular the issue of the windows and classroom
       plinths. Firstly may I thank the architects for having researched the provenance of the
       windows through early photographs of the school and for bringing this evidence along to our
       meeting. This greatly helped the process of assessing the new proposals. Thank you to
       everybody for bearing with me whilst I worked through this material.

       The plinths:
       The plinths are very unusual features to say the least and are probably unique to this school.
       They carry the distinctive double curve that Denis Clarke-Hall uses in various contexts
       throughout the school. We began our discussion by reviewing the reasons for the proposal
       to remove of the plinths - i.e. the constraints they may place upon the flexible use of the
       classroom spaces, the potential for trip hazards and the outdated symbolic significance of
       providing a plinth for the teacher. We discussed ways of mitigating these issues. The
       classroom we reviewed contained 32 seats in pairs at my visit but one pair of places partly
       obstructed the entrance. It was stated it would be necessary to accommodate 30 students.
       In the light of the visual importance of the plinths inside the classrooms, their unusual nature
       and in the context of the architect’s use of curves in the school, it was agreed that they
       would be retained in situ. Their original surfaces would be investigated and exposed if
       suitable (it is thought they are of polished timber).

       The windows
       After a detailed comparison of the existing fabric with photocopies of various (sometimes
       very small) photographs taken when the building was new, it was established that the
       windows on the south-east side of the single-storey classroom blocks and of the two-storey
       range containing the staff accommodation and library, have previously been entirely
       replaced, along with all the north-west facing windows to the single-storey classrooms
       (looking into the courtyards) those in the former gym and those on the south-west side
       (entrance side) of the hall block. This has been done in galvanised steel, to a design which
       followed the window dimensions and rhythm, but which had fewer opening lights than the
       original (where opening lights were virtually continuous at the top and bottom of the glazed
       areas). It was reported that Crittalls, who made the existing windows, have apparently stated
       that they did not galvanise their windows in the 1940s. (The completed school was published
       in July 1940.) The ground floor windows of the two-storey range have changed in design, as
       in the original pattern some of the upper lights were of double width and some were single-
       light in width. It appears that on the ground floor of this block some at least of the lower lights
       opened in concertina fashion.


5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                    49
Planning, Design and Access Statement




       In passing it was noted that the original window cills in the single storey classroom blocks
       had been covered up in timber. The original detail was a narrow projecting band of concrete
       (which, on the courtyard wall of each classroom provides a cill and then rises up at right
       angles to outline the side and top of the classroom doorway. We speculated as to why
       these had been covered up - was it due to damage caused during previous window
       replacement?

       We also established that original timber window frames survive upstairs on the north-west
       side of the library block (above the surviving original bookcases which we agreed would stay
       in situ) and in the little square windows at ground floor level on the same side of the same
       block; also on the north- east side of the hall (now internal) and behind the stage (apparently
       venting a cupboard). Original non-opening frames survive in the corridors onto the
       courtyards between the classrooms and in the entrance hall. It is not known at this stage
       whether the renewed windows were also originally of timber. If so, this might explain their
       early loss. Denis Clarke-Hall continued to work on the school site after the war so it would
       seem very probable that he would have designed or chosen the replacement windows.

       We discussed the school’s wish to improve its energy conservation credentials and the
       relative visual impacts of installing secondary double glazing (which would project
       considerably into the classrooms to clear the inward-opening hopper windows) and new
       double glazing (which would be visually closer to the present internal appearance). It was
       agreed that the timber windows would be retained where they survive- i.e. on the north-west
       side of the two-storey block and the north-east side of the assembly hall. It is proposed that
       the original timber non-opening lights onto the courtyard corridors and entrance hall are re-
       glazed directly into the timber with double glazed steel units and the existing beads and cills
       trimmed and re-fixed. This appears relatively uncontroversial as the windows have no
       glazing bars and would retain exactly the same area of glass and therefore look virtually the
       same. The existing single glazed steel windows on the north-west side of the corridor would
       be retained, and so would the distinctive ribbed cast glass in the clerestory lights on the
       south-east side of the corridor (and of course the extensive range of these in the enclosed
       toilet block).

       I have now discussed with colleagues the proposal to replace the existing replacement steel
       windows on the south-east side of the building, the north-west side of the single-storey
       classrooms and both sides of the former gym. We agree that in the light of their previous
       replacement and in the light of the high visual impact that secondary double glazing would
       have, it would be acceptable in principle to replace the windows with new white coated steel
       windows of appropriate design (details to be agreed with English Heritage).

       It is proposed that the new replacement windows follow the pattern of the existing glazing,
       where it follows the original (i.e. except in the two-storey block, which was previously
       simplified, where it would reproduce the rhythm of the original glazing). We examined the
       moulding profiles of the proposed replacements, which are broadly comparable to the
       existing ones - they are actually slightly narrower than those on the single storey classroom
       blocks and slightly wider than those on the two-storey block. However, the profiles of the
       original (possibly timber) window frames is not known and no drawn sections have so far
       been found (except for the hall range). Clearly if there remain any sources still to investigate
       this should be done as a soon as possible (e.g. has the RIBA Drawings Collection been
       checked? What has happened to Denis Clarke-Hall’s own records since his death in 2006?).
       If the original profiles can be found, it would most certainly be preferable to allow these to
       inform the profiles of the double-glazed replacements.

       We welcome the intention to reinstate the rather subtle, irregular rhythm of windows in the
       two-storey block. Justin Long agreed to investigate whether the reinstatement of the
       concertina glazing on the ground floor was feasible and to report back on this. On the
       classroom blocks we would encourage the reinstatement of the original grouping of the
       windows into groups of three, with a slightly heavier mullion between these groups.

       We discussed the present doors from the library onto the roof terrace (one set of which still
       survive). They are timber and the present proposal is to replace them to a matching glazing
5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                 50
Planning, Design and Access Statement




       pattern but in steel-framed double glazed units. Your architects thought that timber
       replacements would be too slender to carry the weight of double glazed units but it was
       agreed that they would investigate this further.

       Bob Sydes suggested that if English Heritage agrees in principle to the replacements, then
       the next step would be to produce large scale comparative drawings (elevations and
       sections to show both the existing and proposed replacement windows - and I would add,
       the originals too where they are known or can be found). We now request that this is done.

       In terms of process, we are aware that your Council is very anxious to avoid the delay of
       having to make a new application. Given the fact that the windows in question have
       previously been replaced, their replacement once again is in principle less of a change to the
       character of the building than we had previously thought. We would therefore be prepared in
       principle to accept this proposal as an amendment to the original listed building consent,
       providing we are satisfied that the replacement window frames are fully acceptable in detail.
       We would expect to receive copies of the appropriate detailed drawings (referred to in the
       last paragraph) and to agree the details in writing (or alternatively to agree modifications to
       these, as applicable) before the proposals are implemented.

       Lockers
       An illustration showing the original lockers along the corridors has been found and a
       replacement is being designed to match. From the small scale of the photocopy I was
       unable to see the details (for example, whether the corners were square or curved) and I
       would appreciate a ‘blown up’ copy of this to compare with details of the proposed new
       lockers which will need to be provided for our agreement.

       Services on Corridor Ceiling
       A unified, purpose-designed service conduit is proposed for the corridor ceiling, detailed as a
       simple continuous box incorporating lighting, cabling etc. This sounds as though it would be
       acceptable in principle. Details of design and position and also information on the materials
       and finishes are to be provided for our agreement.

       I look forward to seeing further details as the scheme develops.


       Yours sincerely



       Diane Green
       Historic Buildings Inspector
       E-mail: diane.green@english-heritage.org.uk

       cc      Bob Sydes, NYCC
        Dominic Lockett, Atkins
        Ann Smith, Richmondshire District Council




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                51
Planning, Design and Access Statement




       February 2008


       From: GREEN, Diane [Diane.GREEN@english-heritage.org.uk]
       Sent: 07 February 2008 10:11
       To: Lockett, Dominic; Hall, Elizabeth
       Cc: Nye, Jim ; Bob Sydes; Reynolds, David A; Erik Matthews; Ann Smith;
       simon.smales@northyorks.gov.uk
       Subject: Richmond School
       Dear Elizabeth and Dominic,

       Elizabeth kindly sent through her Listed Building Window Analysis, the Record of Listed
       Features document and the offprint from the Architectural Review. Thank you very much for
       these. I had thought this material was for information rather than comment, until I was rung
       up by Jim Nye seeking my feedback. This prompted me to look in more detail at the
       documents - and I am very glad I did as I spotted a problem - see below.

       I should say I am very happy with the Listed Building Window Analysis, which confirms what
       we were discovering on site when I last visited.

       Looking in detail at the Record of Listed Features I have the following comments:

       • I have one major concern - the curved classroom plinths. These are once again
       shown as being lowered, despite the fact that at our last site meeting in the company of
       Simon Smales it was agreed that they should be retained at their present height, and not
       lowered. I hope this is just an oversight and that the intention is to retain them to their full
       height, but please confirm the intention.
       • Also I notice it is proposed to remove the edge plinth from around the inside of Room 330.
       Why? This appears to me to be needless intervention into the historic building. If this
       alteration is to do with room capacity, I can't see it would make much difference - you
       wouldn't want to sit hard up to a wall anyway surely? Also, I can't see it would be a trip
       hazard hard up against the walls.
       • The document does not make clear whether the surviving original timber windows on the
       north side of the hall are to be retained. We would wish them to be retained if at all possible.
       • We do not seem to have any coverage of the 1st floor library, with its original shelves and
       some original timber windows, each of which we would wish to be retained.
       • Regarding the treatment of the coloured tiled floors, the note for Room 289 (the corridor
       outside toilets that was originally open to the air) refers to these being 'protected or carefully
       removed during demolition works'. I would suggest that if possible they should be carefully
       protected and retained in situ rather than taken up as I do wonder whether they
       would survive being taken up.

       Please confirm the intentions on these aspects.

       Many thanks,

       Diane




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                   52
Planning, Design and Access Statement




       May 2008


       From: GREEN, Diane [Diane.GREEN@english-heritage.org.uk]
       Sent: 13 May 2008 11:44
       To: Ross, John M
       Cc: Lockett, Dominic; Hall, Elizabeth; ann.smith@richmondshire.gov.uk;
       simon.smales@northyorks.gov.uk; Reynolds, David A; JAGO, Maddy; ROOME, Hilary;
       Bob Sydes
       Subject: FW: Richmond School
       Dear John,

       Thank you for copying me the latest drawings (Nos A4201 02; A4301 01; A4301 02; A4401 01; a4200
       01; a4400 01; A4S(10)00; A4S(10)02 00; A4S(10)03 00; A4S(10)04 00). (I managed to find a slot to
       look at them before my forthcoming longish absence out of the office.) I have examined the drawings
       and I confirm we are content in principle with these, subject to the matters below: -

       1.A4201 02 has note on toilet area – ‘refer to separate drawing for toilet alterations’, but this is not
       provided. I would like to see it.
       2. No details as yet of proposed replacement locker feature along corridor and no note on plan about
       this. Please clarify where we are with this.
       2. The drawings need to carry a note to the effect that all features are to be retained unless noted on
       the drawings for removal.
       Please confirm that the library shelving will be retained.

       Please keep me in the picture.

       With best wishes,

       Diane



       June 2008


       Ref: RichmondSchool/Correspondence/EnglishHeritage_lt01
       Date: 16th June 2008


       Ms. Diane Green
       English Heritage
       37 Tanner Row
       York
       North Yorkshire
       YO1 6JP


       Dear Sirs,

       Richmond School Redevelopment, Richmond, North Yorkshire

       Further to our meeting on the 29th May 2008, Atkins have now collated all the necessary
       information which you requested. We have enclosed the following documents for your
       approval relating to the Listed Sixth Form Building at Richmond School;

5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                     53
Planning, Design and Access Statement




       1. Information Previously Issued

       We would like to confirm that the ‘Record of Listed Features’ document rev 01 was issued to
       yourself by Atkins on 16th May 2008. Please note we have not attached a further copy of
       this document however one can be provided if required.


       2. Comparison between Original Planning Submission and Recent Minor
       Amendments

       Atkins have prepared a package which should hopefully explain clearly the difference
       between the original planning submission and the recent minor amendments. Atkins have
       produced an A4 matrix which highlights the drawings issued for planning. This indicates the
       drawings, revision numbers and dates for the three issues. They have also produced an A3
       set of the actual drawings for ease of use, one of the original set and a set of the drawings
       issued for minor amendments in May. On the latest drawings Atkins have noted in red the
       areas that have been developed or altered.


       3. Construction Status Information

       5051303/A4L(00)01 rev 0 Existing Basement / Ground Floor Plan
       5051303/A4L(00)02 rev 0 Existing First Floor Plan
       5051303/A4L(00)04 rev 0 Existing Elevations
       5051303/A4L(00)10 rev 0 Existing WC Plan
       5051303/A4L(00)11 rev 0 Existing WC Plan


       3. Construction Status (continued…)

       5051303/A4L(20)01 rev 0 Demolition Plan Basement / Ground Floor
       5051303/A4L(20)02 rev 0 Demolition Plan First Floor
       5051303/A4L(20)04 rev 0 Proposed Basement / Ground Floor
       5051303/A4L(20)05 rev 0 Proposed First Floor
       5051303/A4L(20)06 rev 0 Proposed Roof Plan
       5051303/A4L(20)07 rev 0 Proposed Elevations
       5051303/A4L(20)08 rev 0 Typical Sections 1 of 2
       5051303/A4L(20)09 rev 0 Typical Sections 2 of 2
       5051303/A4L(20)10 rev 0 Proposed WC’s Plan
       5051303/A4L(20)11 rev 0 Proposed WC’s Plan
       5051303/A4L(20)12 rev 0 Bistro Ground Floor Plan

       5051303/A4L(21)03 rev 0 Section C-C Details
       5051303/A4L(21)04 rev 0 Section D-D Details
       5051303/A4L(21)07 rev 0 Section G-G Details
       5051303/A4L(21)08 rev 0 Section H-H Details
       5051303/A4L(21)09 rev 0 Section J-J Details

       5051303/A4L(23)01 rev 0        Proposed Floor Finishes
       5051303/A4L(23)10 rev 0 Proposed Ceiling Plans

       5051303/A4L(31)01 rev 0 Existing External Door Schedule
       5051303/A4L(31)10 rev 0 Proposed Window Schedule


       We trust that the enclosed information is satisfactory and reflects previous conversations
       with myself and Justin Lunn. Please now pass your approval and any other comments to
       NYCC Planning Department at your earliest convenience.


5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                              54
Planning, Design and Access Statement




       Yours faithfully,



       David Reynolds
       for and on behalf of
       Faithful+Gould
       Project Management




       From: GREEN, Diane [mailto:Diane.GREEN@english-heritage.org.uk]
       Sent: 17 June 2008 09:24
       To: Reynolds, David A
       Cc: Lockett, Dominic; Ross, John M; Sharp, Elizabeth (Leaver); Shillito, Paul; Bob Sydes;
       Shillito, Paul; Vicky Perkin; Williams, Emma E; Lunn, Justin S;
       suzanne.firth@northyorks.gov.uk
       Subject: RE: Richmond School: feedback on new proposal; method statement for works to
       Listed Building

       Dave,

       1.    The method statement for the works to the listed building you have attached to your
       e-mail appears acceptable to me. We would wish to see the asbestos survey when it is
       available.

       2.   We agreed at our recent meeting that I would be sent a set of the up to date
       drawings for the listed school building for me to check and sign off (for the avoidance of
       doubt).

       Best wishes,

       Diane



       September 2008


       From: GREEN, Diane [mailto:Diane.GREEN@english-heritage.org.uk]
       Sent: 18 September 2008 11:23
       To: Shillito, Paul; Bob Sydes
       Cc: Vicky Perkin; Lockett, Dominic; Sharp, Elizabeth (Leaver); Cook, Nick; Bell, Peter;
       Reynolds, David A; REDFERN, Neil; Lunn, Justin S
       Subject: RE: Richmond School - Listed Building

       Dear Paul,

       There are some serious issues here, some of which, at least, I would prefer to look at and
       discuss on site. I’m hoping it’s not too late for this.

       To take them in turn: -

       1.     Store-room nr 327 – I don’t remember these shelves and would like another look.

       2.     Main corridor – Rm nr 277: -


5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                           55
Planning, Design and Access Statement




       Heating pipes not sacrosanct I suggest. However, I’m not sure of the historical status of the
       current locker lining. Is this the remains of the original, or is it a later lining in the position of
       the original? I don’t believe I have seen any pictures of the lockers are they originally were.
       Can Elizabeth or Dominic enlighten me on this? The original idea was to reinstate as
       original. Are you now saying there will be too many lockers to do this? If it will be to a
       different design to the original English Heritage would like to see and agree the design. We
       would wish at least some of the internal stonework inside the main corridor to remain visible
       and to be exposed in a way which is in tune with the architect’s original intention (which I
       assume was long narrow timber lockers cantilevered out somewhat with long strips of stone
       above and below – Elizabeth and Dominic to enlighten me on this).

       3. Main Hall – Room nr. 274
       a.      Lighting rig installation: -Proposed additional steel beams to be secured to the
       existing columns. This sounds as though it would be a very significant change and possibly
       a disfiguring one. I will need to see the proposed details of this. Is it strictly necessary? The
       hall is one of the most important spaces in the school and has very considerable character,
       to which the present beams contribute significantly. It is important not to clutter it up with
       extra structure or interfere with the existing structure. It would be best if the lighting
       installation could be both light in weight and discreet.

       b.    Projection room – the issue of cutting a big viewing window instead of the present
       three small holes:
       What are the dimensions of the proposed hole and exactly where? I’d like to check this one
       on site, because it would clearly change the proportions and appearance of the rear wall of
       the hall and I would like to see what over-all effect this would have. Is it really necessary?
       (What about a video link instead of a window?)

       c. Timber floor: What would the floor boxes look like, how large would they be, where and
       what are they made of?

       d. Bleecher/retractable seating: proposal to take up large sections of the floor to
       strengthen the existing timber joists to support the additional weight of a retractable seating
       unit:
       The floor if I recall is attractive original strip timber. The original seating (now unfortunately
       gone) was movable in units of six and hinged up so it could be stacked. Is it necessary to
       use such heavy new seating? Would the present timber floor be re-laid after strengthening?
       More detail please.

       4.   External works: cutting back the paving slabs to accommodate the new curved
       extension: My initial thought is to cut them back to follow the curve, as they are very large.
       Probably one to discuss on site with regard to the practicalities.

       5.  Schedule of Works:
       a.   – noted
       b.  – noted
       c.   – need for concrete repair – yes, I would like to see this on site, and discuss the repair
       methods proposed.

       These are important issues that clearly need appropriate and sensitive solutions, and I am
       very glad indeed you have given English Heritage the opportunity to comment. I would
       welcome any visuals you have of your proposals, and I would be happy to come to
       Richmond to discuss if this would be helpful. (I rang today but you were not in the office.)

       Best wishes,

       Diane Green
       English Heritage




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                       56
Planning, Design and Access Statement




       Ref: 5051083
       Date: 30th September 2008

       Dr Diane Green
       Historic Buildings Inspector
       English Heritage
       37 Tanner Row
       York
       YO1 6WP


       Dear Dr Green,

       Richmond School: Listed Building Works

       Thank you for your comments by email on 18th September 2008 concerning various details
       in the Listed Building at Richmond.

       Further to our conversation on 29th September, we should like to note the following matters
       by way of clarification and supply of further information.

       Main Corridor – Room 227

       Having discussed the locker lining with Liz Hall, she is certain this is a latter addition to the
       original lockers. We can confirm that Liz and the design team are pursuing the reinstatement
       of a line of lockers cantilevered out as originally requested. Since the school are looking for
       450 lockers in this area - the recent solution adopted by the school was stacked lockers on
       the large window side - we are proposing these are replaced, but with less lockers. There
       will therefore be lockers on both sides.

       Main Hall – Room 274

       We examined a lighting installation that would require mounting from the soffit. As previously
       noted, this would require steel rafters/beams spanning the hall. As we discussed, these
       would likely be parallel and to the underside of the existing castellated concrete beams, fixed
       to the columns. We note this is unacceptable to you and we should pursue alternatives that
       are lighter and more discreet, preferably fixed from the wall.

       Main Hall – Projection Room

       The opening for a projection window would be approximately 750mm x 1800mm – just about
       suitable to allow two seated people a clear view of the hall. It would be central and likely
       replace the existing holes. The school believe it is necessary if the hall is to function as a
       theatre. We note your preference to avoid this work and for alternative solutions to be
       sought.

       Main Hall – Floor Boxes

       The floor boxes would likely be steel and fixed flush into the surface of the hall floor. They
       may be around 300mm x 300mm. They cover power, audio and visual sockets when not in
       use. We are not sure if we can get cables to them from the perimeter by pulling them under
       the floor without raising the floor boards. We understand the basic floor construction of 1”
       oak flooring on 2” x 2” battens but can not tell if this is unobstructed.

       Main Hall – Retractable Seating

       The school would like to create a tiered seating arrangement in keeping with a theatre style
       layout. We are not sure on the condition of the existing floor. It is likely that to establish its

5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                   57
Planning, Design and Access Statement




       robustness, you would lift and set aside the floor to check the sub floor condition and the
       counter battens, strengthen if necessary and then replace the floor.

       Main Hall – Infrastructure and Wiring

       Our discussion centred on how we might distribute cables and the like from the projection
       room to the rear of the hall. One possibility noted was by routing cables out of the hall and
       through the adjacent new drama area.

       There are still a few items we didn’t discuss. Hopefully these can be resolved by
       correspondence or further dialogue with the design team.

       Finally, thank you for your offer to visit site and discuss these issues with the design team.
       You may receive a call from Liz in the near future.

       Yours sincerely

       David A Reynolds
       Faithful+Gould
       Project Management




       October 2008


       From: GREEN, Diane [mailto:Diane.GREEN@english-heritage.org.uk]
       Sent: 20 October 2008 13:08
       To: Reynolds, David A
       Cc: Vicky Perkin; Bob Sydes; Suzanne Firth; Lunn, Justin S; Cook, Nick; Williams, Emma E;
       Ross, John M; Sharp, Elizabeth (Leaver); Wardle, Phil J; Ingham, David S; Dulake, Philip;
       Beever, Phil; Shillito, Paul; Lockett, Dominic
       Subject: RE: Richmond School: Listed Building: letter to Dr Diane Green 30 Sept 2008

       Dear David,

       Thank you for this.

       Main corridor lockers:
       ·      We would wish to agree the design of the new lockers. (Are there any records of what
       it originally looked like, so this can inform their replacement?)
       ·      We would wish the internal stonework in the corridor to be at least partially visible
       above, and if possible below.
       Main Hall: lighting
       ·      Noted you are seeking an alternative. I look forward to further information.
       Main hall: projection room
       ·      Could you sketch me the elevation with the window shown so I can assess its probable
       impact?
       Main hall: Floor boxes
       ·      How many floor boxes would there be?
       Main hall: retractable seating:
       ·      We would wish the floor to remain on view and to be undamaged by any seating. Am I
       to understand that the seating itself would be mobile and therefore not fixed to the floor (and
       that there would not be any fixed runners etc?).
       Main hall: infrastructure and wiring:
       ·      I look forward to your further thoughts on this.

5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                                                58
Planning, Design and Access Statement




       Please keep me in the picture. With best wishes,

       Diane




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                 59
Planning, Design and Access Statement




                                            Appendix E
                     Consented Scheme Drawings




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                60
Planning, Design and Access Statement




E.1         Floor Plans
E.1.1       Existing Listed Building Floor Plans Drawing No. A4200
E.1.2       Proposed Listed Building Floor Plans Drawing No. A4201 Rev 01




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                   61
Planning, Design and Access Statement




E.2         Elevations
E.2.1       Existing Listed Building Elevations Drawing No. A4300
E.2.2       Proposed Listed Building Elevations Drawing No. A4301 Rev 01




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                                  62
Planning, Design and Access Statement




E.3         Classroom Sections
E.3.1       Existing Listed Building Typical Classroom Sections A4400
E.3.2       Proposed Listed Building Classroom Sections A4441




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc                               63
Planning, Design and Access Statement




5044576/Richmond Girls High Statement.doc   64

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:2
posted:12/21/2011
language:
pages:73