Bishop Road School: Objection to Current Planning Application 09/02212/FB

Lead petitioner : Fran Bolton

Status: New > Draft > Rejected > Accepted > Collecting signatures > Awaiting submission > Submitted > Pending owner response > Closed > Withdrawn

Status: Closed

Petition

Whilst supporting Bishop Road Primary School’s decision to admit an extra reception class in September 2009, we object to plans to place two demountable classrooms at the school on a green area of ground (planning application number 09/02212/FB). If there is a need for an additional classroom this will not be until the extra class reaches year 3 at the earliest ie. in Sept 2012 so there is plenty of time for discussion of other options.

Background information

We feel the decision for their location has been ill thought-out, reached with little consideration of alternatives, and no discussion with stakeholders. It is not actually required for at least another 3 years . It will also destroy a valuable and irreplaceable green space in a densely populated school.

Bristol City Council has been very slow in recognising the need for additional reception age school places for September 2009 across Bristol and most primary schools have refused to take extra children. In spring 2009, Bishop Road Primary School was asked to take one additional reception class from September 2009 for one year only (it is planned that these children will remain at Bishop Road for the 7 years of their primary schooling). Bishop Road has been placed in an impossible position feeling duty bound to support children from the surrounding areas. The governors at Bishop Road have supported this difficult decision. This e.petition is not concerning that decision. Our objection is to the proposal to add two new classrooms to be placed on the school’s conservation area (application number 09/0184/F) for the following reasons:

1. Communication about the planning application has been inadequate.

The document ‘Building Bulletin (BB99)’ is used by the council for guidance on Primary School projects such as this one. It states that,

‘The approach should be determined through discussions with key stakeholders such as staff, pupils and parents.’ (BB99 page 15).

There have been no discussions with parents at Bishop Road and the lack of communication between school and community has left many parents feeling disappointed, frustrated, or angry.

The senior leadership at Bishop Road have not communicated the need for planning permission to parents so the school community has not been kept informed. One public notice advertising the planning application has been put up at the school (on 6th June) but local residents have not yet been notified (date: 7th June) despite the application being submitted on 26th May.

Since then numerous letters from parents requesting a meeting or clarification from the Head and governors have gone completely unanswered, including those from parents with nursery class children who will be directly affected by the enlarged reception intake.

2. There is no need for the new classroom at the present time.

The new building will not be used to accommodate the 30 additional reception pupils. The Head at Bishop Road has already said that,

‘...children in Year reception will all be taught in the Edgar building’ (letter to parents 14th May 2009).

There is an additional room in the Early Years area and other ‘spare’ rooms in the main school, according to information passed on from the Head at Bishop Road School to the Strategy Leader for Innovation and Access at Bristol City Council.

3. The site of Bishop Road School is unsuitable for further building work.

After a site visit to Bishop Road, the Strategy Leader for Innovation and Access at Bristol City Council has written,

‘The main site is too small for demountables – the play area is far too small’; he went on to note that the addition of 30 extra children would result in a ‘grossly deficient play area’ (March 9th).
It is highly inappropriate to further reduce this space by adding extra buildings which are not essential.

4. Environmental considerations

i. The removal of the conservation area would result in no provision at Bishop Road School for on-site outdoor environmental work for the whole of the junior section of the school (years 3-6)

ii. On sustainability, the DCSF states (May 2008),

‘We would like all schools – old and new – to manage and, where possible, design their buildings in ways that visibly demonstrate sustainable development to everyone who uses the school.’

Metal portacabins which will be removed after 7 years could not be considered sustainable and contravene the DCSF's own recommendations for good practice.

iii. Bishopston has been highlighted as a Wildlife Deprivation Area by Bristol City Council; it is particularly densely populated and short of green space.

Ways Forward

If there is a need for an additional classroom this will not be until the additional class reaches year 3 at the earliest ie. in Sept 2012. This means there is plenty of time for a full and proper discussion about the school’s accommodation with governors, parents, and other local stake holders. Importantly there are 3 more years when the playground and conservation area can be fully used by the children. There are other options for classrooms within the existing buildings at Bishop Road to consider. The pros and cons of different options need to be considered systematically, rationally and without undue haste.

In conclusion, Bishop Road is helping the local community and children from surrounding areas by taking a fourth reception class. The planning application for additional classrooms, however, is an example of crisis management at its worst and if passed shows the council’s neglect of duty towards the care of children as well as the local environment.

Signature Count

114