WHY ARE NEIGHBOURS SO CONCERNED?
Residents say they would have no problem with refurbishment of current buildings, however the School's expansion proposals would lead to numerous adverse consequences for the community. These consequences are out of all proportion to any benefits for the School, and DNA believe the School has alternative ways of developing its business.
The following sections cover areas which neighbours were most concerned about, and which were in line with the council's list of valid reasons for objection to a planning application.
Councillors in particular may be particularly interested in how DNA's objections relate to specific Planning Policies. Please click here for further information on this.
REASONS FOR OBJECTION (Compiled for the original application, but equally valid for the 'new' application in view of the expansion implied in Appendix K to the new application)
Traffic: an increase in pupil numbers would worsen an already bad traffic situation
As made clear by the results of our Neighbour Survey, on current pupil numbers traffic is a major problem for a large number of residents, with frequent blockages and illegal parking common, and clearly linked to school pick-up/drop-off times.
The School’s travel plan (part of its application) is based on inadequate data and the predictions of reductions in car traffic are not supported by the data or previous experience. In September 2012, the school began experimenting with access via Carlisle Park. Nothing that we have seen suggests that this would be effective in solving the problems that would be created by the proposed development, and the School are currently refusing to tell us how they would control any changed access. Denmead's previous attempts to control parents' parking have had limited and only temporary effect.
DNA believe the application would breach LBruT planning policies Core Policy CP5 and Policy DM TP 1 on matching development to transport capacity and DM TP 8 on parking.
Click here for more information
As made clear by the results of our Neighbour Survey, on current pupil numbers traffic is a major problem for a large number of residents, with frequent blockages and illegal parking common, and clearly linked to school pick-up/drop-off times.
The School’s travel plan (part of its application) is based on inadequate data and the predictions of reductions in car traffic are not supported by the data or previous experience. In September 2012, the school began experimenting with access via Carlisle Park. Nothing that we have seen suggests that this would be effective in solving the problems that would be created by the proposed development, and the School are currently refusing to tell us how they would control any changed access. Denmead's previous attempts to control parents' parking have had limited and only temporary effect.
DNA believe the application would breach LBruT planning policies Core Policy CP5 and Policy DM TP 1 on matching development to transport capacity and DM TP 8 on parking.
Click here for more information
Loss of Open Land
The site is zoned as OOLTI (Other Open Land of Townscape Importance). Under LBRuT’s Core Strategy DM OS 3 development should be “in tune with its setting” and the land should be “protected and enhanced in open use”.
This site has been a playing field site for decades, and apart from the sports hall, the three single-storey flat roofed classrooms are unobtrusive. Most of the site is open grass, with a good number of trees on the boundaries to the south and east. The school are seeking to change the site from an ancillary playing field site with classrooms to a stand-alone school. Their proposals would lead to:
We are concerned about the impact the loss of grassland will have on local wildlife, and also the impact of the buildings and artificial surfaces on the trees, particularly those on the southern side which are large mature trees. They are close to the Wensleydale Gardens houses and would be even closer to the proposed building, the MUGA pitches and the construction work; so far as we are aware they are not subject to Tree Protection Orders.
Policy DM OS 3 states that in land which is zoned as OOLTI, development should only be:
“a replacement or minor extension of existing build facilities’ and
“not harm the character and openness of the open land”
The proposed development is inconsistent with both these requirements. There is also the question of whether the loss of open space should be referred to the Secretary of State under Circular 07/99.
Click here for more information
The site is zoned as OOLTI (Other Open Land of Townscape Importance). Under LBRuT’s Core Strategy DM OS 3 development should be “in tune with its setting” and the land should be “protected and enhanced in open use”.
This site has been a playing field site for decades, and apart from the sports hall, the three single-storey flat roofed classrooms are unobtrusive. Most of the site is open grass, with a good number of trees on the boundaries to the south and east. The school are seeking to change the site from an ancillary playing field site with classrooms to a stand-alone school. Their proposals would lead to:
- An enormous two storey light industrial style building with double the floor area of the existing buildings and at least double the mass of the existing buildings
- A building of this size and style is completely inconsistent with the locality
- Loss of the existing pavilion which blends in well in style, allowing a view through to the houses beyond, with similar materials and roof size. The new building would be three times the size of the existing pavilion, would block the view of the houses behind (8m high roof), and would become the principal focus from Carlisle Park and neighbouring properties.
- Introduction of a Multi-Use Games Area (MUGA). We would expect the MUGA fencing to be 2m or even 3m high, with floodlighting
We are concerned about the impact the loss of grassland will have on local wildlife, and also the impact of the buildings and artificial surfaces on the trees, particularly those on the southern side which are large mature trees. They are close to the Wensleydale Gardens houses and would be even closer to the proposed building, the MUGA pitches and the construction work; so far as we are aware they are not subject to Tree Protection Orders.
Policy DM OS 3 states that in land which is zoned as OOLTI, development should only be:
“a replacement or minor extension of existing build facilities’ and
“not harm the character and openness of the open land”
The proposed development is inconsistent with both these requirements. There is also the question of whether the loss of open space should be referred to the Secretary of State under Circular 07/99.
Click here for more information
Local Character and Neighbourliness
The existing unobtrusive buildings are all single storey with flat roofs except for the sports pavilion, and the majority of the site is taken up with grassed sports pitches. The size and materials of the buildings are in keeping with their surroundings. The site provides a green outlook from Carlisle Park and surrounding properties, with long views across the site to houses or the park beyond.
The proposed building is on a different footprint to the existing classroom buildings. It is over double the floor space of the combined existing buildings, and is two storeys high in a rectangular warehouse style. Its size, shape and materials are completely out of keeping with those of surrounding buildings. It would dwarf the site and its surroundings and bears no resemblance to any other building in its vicinity. Click here for photographic evidence!
The proposed building and other facilities , sports pitches, parking, are too close to neighbouring properties, many of whom have shallow gardens. The DNA have calculated, by reference to W.C. provision and means of escape (the only statutory requirements) that it has capacity for well over 200 pupils.
The proposed location of the MUGA sites breaches the Sport England Design and Construction recommendations on distance from houses, which are for a separation of 30m, with a minimum of 12m. One house is less than 12m away, another two are within 20m. There is no provision for protection against noise breakout or floodlight spillage by landscaping, again contrary to the recommendations.
LBRuT policy states that development should be in keeping with the character of its surroundings and should not involve an unreasonable loss of privacy and visual intrusion for neighbours.
Click here for more information
The proposed building is on a different footprint to the existing classroom buildings. It is over double the floor space of the combined existing buildings, and is two storeys high in a rectangular warehouse style. Its size, shape and materials are completely out of keeping with those of surrounding buildings. It would dwarf the site and its surroundings and bears no resemblance to any other building in its vicinity. Click here for photographic evidence!
The proposed building and other facilities , sports pitches, parking, are too close to neighbouring properties, many of whom have shallow gardens. The DNA have calculated, by reference to W.C. provision and means of escape (the only statutory requirements) that it has capacity for well over 200 pupils.
The proposed location of the MUGA sites breaches the Sport England Design and Construction recommendations on distance from houses, which are for a separation of 30m, with a minimum of 12m. One house is less than 12m away, another two are within 20m. There is no provision for protection against noise breakout or floodlight spillage by landscaping, again contrary to the recommendations.
LBRuT policy states that development should be in keeping with the character of its surroundings and should not involve an unreasonable loss of privacy and visual intrusion for neighbours.
Click here for more information
Lighting and floodlighting
New high intensity lighting was installed in January 2011. Security lights are left on all night and the glare is bright enough to interfere with sleep in upstairs rooms on Scotts Drive boundary and is intrusive in some homes in Wensleydale Gardens. Complaints have been made to the school.
Floodlights were installed at roof level on Jubilee Hall without permission being sought from local residents or the Council. Occasionally these have been left on late into the evening and overnight causing significant disturbance and sleep interference in the bedrooms of young children on Scotts Drive.
The proposed new building would have two storeys and it is likely that there would be more security lighting and floodlighting for the MUGA pitch. Any increase in lighting would have further adverse and unacceptable impact on residents.
All floodlighting on the site should conform to LBRuT Policies DM DC5 and DM OS9.
Click here for more information
Floodlights were installed at roof level on Jubilee Hall without permission being sought from local residents or the Council. Occasionally these have been left on late into the evening and overnight causing significant disturbance and sleep interference in the bedrooms of young children on Scotts Drive.
The proposed new building would have two storeys and it is likely that there would be more security lighting and floodlighting for the MUGA pitch. Any increase in lighting would have further adverse and unacceptable impact on residents.
All floodlighting on the site should conform to LBRuT Policies DM DC5 and DM OS9.
Click here for more information
Noise and Disturbance
The DNA neighbours' survey showed residents have had an increasing problem with noise and disturbance from out of hours activities in the evening and at weekends, including non-school events in the hall. The houses on all sides are affected, but it is at its most severe on north and south boundaries where gardens are shallow.
The planning history of the site shows concern by LBRuT to control noise and disturbance on the site. An existing planning condition stipulates that the permitted hours of use of Jubilee Hall are 9am to 5pm Monday-Friday. This is not observed by the school.
When considering both the 1985 (Sports Hall rebuild) and 1992 (additional single temporary classroom for DT/IT work) planning applications, the Council were concerned about levels of noise and disturbance on the site. The school provided written assurances to the Council that the applications were made to improve facilities and not for an increase of pupil numbers (letters of 22 March 1985 and 15 April 1992 on the planning files).
Expansion of activities on site would have significant impact on neighbours due to:
The proposed location of the MUGA site breaches the Sport England Design and Construction recommendations on distance from houses, which are for a separation of 30m, with a minimum of 12m. One house is less than 12m away, another two are within 20m. There is no provision for protection against noise breakout or floodlight spillage by landscaping, again contrary to the recommendations.
The proposals are contrary to LBRuT Adopted Development Management Plan Nov 2011, Policy DM DC 5 Neighbourliness, Sunlighting and Daylighting . "In considering proposals for development the Council will seek to protect adjoining properties from unreasonable loss of privacy, pollution, visual intrusion, noise and disturbance".
Click here for more information
The DNA neighbours' survey showed residents have had an increasing problem with noise and disturbance from out of hours activities in the evening and at weekends, including non-school events in the hall. The houses on all sides are affected, but it is at its most severe on north and south boundaries where gardens are shallow.
The planning history of the site shows concern by LBRuT to control noise and disturbance on the site. An existing planning condition stipulates that the permitted hours of use of Jubilee Hall are 9am to 5pm Monday-Friday. This is not observed by the school.
When considering both the 1985 (Sports Hall rebuild) and 1992 (additional single temporary classroom for DT/IT work) planning applications, the Council were concerned about levels of noise and disturbance on the site. The school provided written assurances to the Council that the applications were made to improve facilities and not for an increase of pupil numbers (letters of 22 March 1985 and 15 April 1992 on the planning files).
Expansion of activities on site would have significant impact on neighbours due to:
- increase in pupil numbers during day time activities
- relocation of sports facilities closer to boundaries (proposed MUGA pitch with fencing next to Wensleydale Gardens, cricket pitch and nets by Scotts Drive
The proposed location of the MUGA site breaches the Sport England Design and Construction recommendations on distance from houses, which are for a separation of 30m, with a minimum of 12m. One house is less than 12m away, another two are within 20m. There is no provision for protection against noise breakout or floodlight spillage by landscaping, again contrary to the recommendations.
The proposals are contrary to LBRuT Adopted Development Management Plan Nov 2011, Policy DM DC 5 Neighbourliness, Sunlighting and Daylighting . "In considering proposals for development the Council will seek to protect adjoining properties from unreasonable loss of privacy, pollution, visual intrusion, noise and disturbance".
Click here for more information
Access
CONSTRUCTION ACCESS
The application proposes that Wensleydale Gardens should be used by construction traffic on a temporary basis to access the site and on a permanent basis by emergency traffic.
The DNA submits that the proposed construction access would be unsafe, that the emergency access is unnecessary and that both would adversely affect the amenity of residents.
The cul-de-sac is narrow, the front gardens are shallow and unfenced. There is almost no kerb parking possible in the hammerheads and Carlisle Park users also park in the road. The road is not wide enough for two way traffic if cars are parked along one side.
There is a pedestrian access to Carlisle Park which is not easily visible. Many park users walk down the middle of the road as there is no pavement on the park-side of the road. Construction traffic would pose a significant hazard to park users.
Denmead's pre-prep school on Wensleydale Road is positioned just opposite Wensleydale Gardens entrance. School parking already creates road and driveway blockages.
There would need to be parking constrictions for over 12 hours a day with a half day on Saturday. This will intrude on the lives of the residents in terms of noise, disturbance, and lack of anywhere to park. Some of those affected would be elderly and disabled residents who have specific parking needs for care providers.
EMERGENCY ACCESS
The existing access to the Gloucester Road site must satisfy health and safety concerns or the school could not operate.
The school have chosen to propose a design that would make the pinch point on the Gloucester Road entrance worse as the new building would jut out into the line of the existing access road adversely affecting the swept path. This is a matter for the school to resolve and not a reason to open up a cul-de-sac, many of whose residents have lived there since the 1960s.
In addition, moving the emergency exit permanently to Wensleydale Gardens would mean a need for permanent parking restrictions in a road in which currently there are none.
The residents consider that if the school are allowed this emergency access, the process of incremental expansion on this site would soon produce pressure to open up this access to general traffic. They totally oppose this as it would destroy the nature of the road as a cul-de-sac.
The use of Wensleydale Gardens in short term for construction and long term for emergency traffic is contrary to planning policy.
London Plan Policy 6.3 is concerned with the impact of new development on the local transport network. Policy 6.3A states:
Development proposals should ensure that impacts on transport capacity and the transport network...at a local level, are fully assessed. Development should not affect safety on the transport network".
Policy 6.3B "Where existing transport capacity is insufficient to allow for the travel generated by the proposed developments...boroughs should ensure that development proposals are phased until it is known these requirements can be met, otherwise they may be refused"
Click here for more information
The application proposes that Wensleydale Gardens should be used by construction traffic on a temporary basis to access the site and on a permanent basis by emergency traffic.
The DNA submits that the proposed construction access would be unsafe, that the emergency access is unnecessary and that both would adversely affect the amenity of residents.
The cul-de-sac is narrow, the front gardens are shallow and unfenced. There is almost no kerb parking possible in the hammerheads and Carlisle Park users also park in the road. The road is not wide enough for two way traffic if cars are parked along one side.
There is a pedestrian access to Carlisle Park which is not easily visible. Many park users walk down the middle of the road as there is no pavement on the park-side of the road. Construction traffic would pose a significant hazard to park users.
Denmead's pre-prep school on Wensleydale Road is positioned just opposite Wensleydale Gardens entrance. School parking already creates road and driveway blockages.
There would need to be parking constrictions for over 12 hours a day with a half day on Saturday. This will intrude on the lives of the residents in terms of noise, disturbance, and lack of anywhere to park. Some of those affected would be elderly and disabled residents who have specific parking needs for care providers.
EMERGENCY ACCESS
The existing access to the Gloucester Road site must satisfy health and safety concerns or the school could not operate.
The school have chosen to propose a design that would make the pinch point on the Gloucester Road entrance worse as the new building would jut out into the line of the existing access road adversely affecting the swept path. This is a matter for the school to resolve and not a reason to open up a cul-de-sac, many of whose residents have lived there since the 1960s.
In addition, moving the emergency exit permanently to Wensleydale Gardens would mean a need for permanent parking restrictions in a road in which currently there are none.
The residents consider that if the school are allowed this emergency access, the process of incremental expansion on this site would soon produce pressure to open up this access to general traffic. They totally oppose this as it would destroy the nature of the road as a cul-de-sac.
The use of Wensleydale Gardens in short term for construction and long term for emergency traffic is contrary to planning policy.
London Plan Policy 6.3 is concerned with the impact of new development on the local transport network. Policy 6.3A states:
Development proposals should ensure that impacts on transport capacity and the transport network...at a local level, are fully assessed. Development should not affect safety on the transport network".
Policy 6.3B "Where existing transport capacity is insufficient to allow for the travel generated by the proposed developments...boroughs should ensure that development proposals are phased until it is known these requirements can be met, otherwise they may be refused"
Click here for more information
Ecology and Trees
The school's application would result in transformation of the site from being mostly grass to being mostly artificial surface/concrete/building. By rough calculation the change is from four-fifths grass to one third grass.
The site is used by many birds who feed on grassland. These include thrushes, redwing, fieldfare, starlings and blackbirds. They mostly use the land when the school is not in use.
The proposals would mean an enlargement of buildings and hard surface areas. The two artificial pitches (MUGA) may be permeable but do not provide any habitat. The result is a site dominated by artificial surfaces.
The DNA submit that a significant loss of scarce grassland habitat is contrary to planning policy.
The line of trees at the south of the site forms a corridor of habitat assisted by the enclosing of the ground by fencing. The school should be obliged to protect and preserve the trees and habitat.
The proposals are contrary to Policy DM OS 5 Biodiversity and New Development and Planning Policy DM DC 4
Click here for more information
The site is used by many birds who feed on grassland. These include thrushes, redwing, fieldfare, starlings and blackbirds. They mostly use the land when the school is not in use.
The proposals would mean an enlargement of buildings and hard surface areas. The two artificial pitches (MUGA) may be permeable but do not provide any habitat. The result is a site dominated by artificial surfaces.
The DNA submit that a significant loss of scarce grassland habitat is contrary to planning policy.
The line of trees at the south of the site forms a corridor of habitat assisted by the enclosing of the ground by fencing. The school should be obliged to protect and preserve the trees and habitat.
The proposals are contrary to Policy DM OS 5 Biodiversity and New Development and Planning Policy DM DC 4
Click here for more information