Malsis School’s plans to build more than 40 new homes within its grounds are being recommended for approval next week.
The Glusburn independent school, which last month had a separate scheme for a development of five homes approved, is hoping to build around 27 homes on one site and a further 14 homes on a second site.
The latest application, a resubmission of one refused by Craven District Council in November, is now recommended for approval.
But Tuesday’s planning committee meeting will hear that unlike the smaller application, which was approved largely because of its “enabling” function to secure repairs to the listed Malsis Hall, the larger scheme must be decided on its own merits.
The smaller scheme, which had the backing of English Heritage, was also approved subject to the school signing a legal agreement which ensur- ed that money raised by the development would be ring-fenced for repairs.
“The current application now under consideration is slightly unclear with respect to whether the council is being asked to approve development as enabling development, or to approve it purely on its own merits,” says the report.
“If considered and approved as enabling development no more development should be allowed than necessary to repair the listed building and there would be no requirement to make a contribution to affordable housing.”
However, if approved on its own merits, the school could choose how to use money raised from the development.
“For the avoidance of doubt, officers are recommending that the application be considered purely on its planning merits and not as enabling development,” says the report.
The proposed sites have been used for sport and if approved, alternative facilities will have to be provided.
The council has received 103 comments about the application, including 98 in support, and five raising objections.
Glusburn and Cross Hills Parish Council previously commented it had no objections to the scheme and supported the application.
Comments in support included a need for good quality housing and that the development would secure the long term future of the school and help provide facilities for sports clubs in the area and employment for local people.
Those opposed to the development were concerned about a lack of screening during winter months when trees were not in full leaf, the number of houses being too high and the irreversible loss of a greenfield site