Neighbours support a BETTER but not BIGGER school.
Yes, the fact is that neighbours are united behind the improvement of school buildings and facilities. They are not in opposition to the school. This is one of several myths that have arisen over the course of eighteen months since the plans were first presented. With reference to DNA neighbourhood survey and other analysis, we aim to explode some of the myths.
MYTH #1"Neighbours object to the school improving its facilities"
|
FACTNeighbours would support a plan to replace and refurbish existing buildings. They object to the potential growth of pupil numbers at Gloucester Road and the resulting increase in traffic chaos, noise and disturbance and the scale of the proposed building from a single storey to two storey.
|
MYTH #2
|
FACTThe number of pupils has continually crept up from low 100s in the1980s to 131 in 2011 and 144 in 2012. The assurances limiting numbers given by the School to obtain previous planning applications appear to have been forgotten. Previous planning applications have acknowledged the limits of the site and its close proximity to long-established residential housing.
Traffic congestion and problem parking are already at an unsatisfactory level. Using alternative access via Carlisle Park simply shifts the problem to other roads. An additional 40+ pupils since 2011 would mean potentially 40+ more cars. Furthermore, the proposed new building is designed for >200 pupils. Imagine the scenario of >60 extra cars trying to park on our already jammed roads? |
MYTH #3"The School will reduce the nuisance of road blockages and problem parking by encouraging more children to walk and/or cycle"
|
FACT
Denmead is not a local catchment school. It is unreasonable to expect a shift from car to pedestrian/cycle travel. Our analysis of the Planning Application Supporting comments, by parents of the school, showed that 63% of pupils travelled from outside of Hampton. A large number of pupils come from Twickenham, Teddington, Strawberry Hill, Richmond direction. Many come across the river from East/West Molesey, Walton, Esher, Long Ditton. Just over a third are within walking distance, but in reality many parents use the car to continue their journey to work . Click to view analysis |
MYTH #4
"The site on Gloucester Road has long been established as a fully-functioning school site. Neighbours chose to live next to a school so should accept the consequences"
|
FACTThe site is bordered on three sides by residential houses which were built long before the classrooms. Since the 1970s the open space was used as playing fields with temporary classrooms to supplement the Wensleydale Road site. The Council has historically protected the unique nature of this site by applying conditions on the development of temporary, single-storey classrooms to ensure that neighbours did not experience undue nuisance and disturbance. In fact, the site has long been designated as "other Open Land of Townscape Importance" which aims to protect the local character of the site and maintain it as open space. Click to view site history
|
MYTH #5The school is not a viable concern at current pupil numbers. Growth is necessary to ensure future prosperity and enable it to be competitive with similar independent schools in the area.
|
FACTDNA's corporate property consultant worked with the School Heads to explore an alternative option of reduced scale which could still deliver a positive financial return. The DNA proposed a BETTER not BIGGER school with enhanced facilities which the Heads seemed to acknowledge as a good idea. However, the Planning Application which was submitted did not reflect this. It is surely in the best interests of all, especially the children, to maintain smaller class sizes.
|
MYTH #6There is no alternative to a 2-storey building, integrated with Jubilee Hall
|
FACTThere is an alternative which would be close to current footprint and single storey. This option has been rejected by the school as it would require provision of temporary accommodation for the pupils during construction. As a matter of interest, another independent school in the area with similar space constraints (LEH Junior) managed to refurbish whilst using temporary buildings so it should be feasible.
|
MYTH #7The School have fully consulted with neighbours and have made many compromises to meet the neighbours' concerns.
|
FACTThe DNA and School Heads met to discuss concerns but the Planning Application that was submitted failed to address the primary issues: expansion of the school in both pupil numbers and the scale of the building; proximity to neighbour's properties and negative impact of construction access via Wensleydale Gardens. Since the original Planning Application was made in December 2011, the School have not consulted with neighbours even though there were more than 150 objections from local residents. The School have continued to liaise with the Planners at the Council and are carrying out trials of alternative access via Carlisle Park. However, there has been no further communication with residents who are concerned about how this access could be controlled without disruption to Wensleydale Road, Wensleydale Gardens and Carlisle Road/Scotts Drive. Neighbours received no warning from the school ablout the 'new' application.
|
MYTH #8The School will reduce the nuisance of road blockages and problem parking on Gloucester Road by using Carlisle Park as an access for pupils.
|
FACTShifting the problem to another road does not solve the problem, particularly as Wensleydale Road, Wensleydale Gardens and Carlisle Road already bear the traffic burden of other school sites: Carlisle School and Denmead pre-prep. A further potential increase in pupil numbers from 131 to 176 means potentially 40 extra cars. The new school building capacity could mean 200+ pupils or up to 60 more cars! This is an issue that affects all the community not just one road.
|
MYTH #9Using Wensleydale Gardens as a construction access would cause only temporary disruption to residents and would be made bearable using Considerate Constructor's Scheme. There is no alternative to using this access point.
|
FACTThe proximity of houses to the road means there would be considerable noise, disturbance and potentially damage to property. The overhanging trees in Carlisle Park would be an obstruction to large vehicles. Damage to the trees would cause considerable ecological damage to birds and wildlife. Residents' parking would have to be reduced to enable passing space for construction vehicles. Access to and exit from Carlisle Park would be dangerous for the many people (including young children) who use the gate on Wensleydale Gardens.
The School have not presented an option for access via the current Gloucester Road gate on the grounds that it would mean temporary accommodation for pupils at an offsite location. LEH Junior School refurbished on a similarly restricted site and re-housed pupils in temporary accommodation. |
MYTH #10Emergency vehicles would not be able to access the School via Gloucester Road entrance (the proposal is that Wensleydale Gardens would be used for Emergency access only).
|
FACTThe existing entrance must be suitable otherwise the School would not be open for business. The 'new' application moves the building position marginally, which improves access from Gloucester Road. There is no need to break into a narrow cul-de-sac. There would have to be permanent parking restrictions in place on Wensleydale Gardens to ensure that a Fire Engine could pass without impedance. In some cases this could prevent residents from parking anywhere near their properties. Also, once a gate is in place, experience has shown that it would eventually be used for general access - e.g. Carlisle Park now being used for children's access.
|