3 responses from Mrs Helen Storey, Pennington CE Primary School
1. Mrs Helen Storey, Pennington CE Primary School : 17 Apr 2012 16:41:00
Before completing this online representation please tick the box to show you have read the 'Guidance Notes for Making a Representation'
I have read the guidance notes
Policy/Site No.
LA5.6 Land at Cross-a-Moor, Swarthmoor
1.1 Do you consider that the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD is legally compliant?
Yes
2.1 Do you consider that the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD is sound?
No
2.2 If NO please identify which test of soundness your representation relates to by selecting the relevant option(s) below and completing section 2.3.
The DPD is not justified in that it is not founded on a robust and credible evidence base and/or is not considered the most appropriate strategy when considered against the reasonable alternatives.
2.3 Please give details of the change(s) you consider necessary to make the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD sound, having regard to the test you have identified at question 2.2 above.
It would be helpful if you could state your proposed change to the DPD and the reasons why you think it is necessary.
The document is not sound for a number of reasons but primarily it says in the guidance notes that there must be ‘evidence of participation of the local community and others having a stake in the area’.
Surely this would mean some form of communication/consultation with the local school and its community, ie Pennington CE Primary School. This has not happened at any stage. The school is a local service and amenity and provides a focal point for local children and parents and other community users. And, as a consequence of this floored procedure the whole school community has had no opportunity to participate in the process.
The proposed site falls within Pennington CE Primary School catchment area and at present, and for the foreseeable future, the school is almost full (203 on roll / capacity 210). 126 dwellings would bring in a considerable number of primary school age children. What is the proposal for allocating places to those children? The school buildings cannot take in any more children and the land on which the school stands has no room for building expansion. None of these issues has been addressed.
Under the same section it also refers to Research/fact finding – once again I would say that this has not been undertaken efficiently; within the planning document it refers to Pennington Junior School which it clearly is not – we are a Primary school and there is a significant difference. If this one simple piece of research has not been carried out correctly what other mistakes have been made.
Clearly no research/fact finding has been carried out regarding the impact on safety during peak traffic periods (particularly the beginning and end of the school day) at the Cross a Moor junction or along Cross a Moor itself. Traffic backs up from the school to the A590 and this would also impact on the proposed entrance to the site from Cross a Moor and cause even greater safety issues.
The suggestion that pedestrian facilities need to be provided on both sides of Cross a Moor would also create even greater parking and safety issues which do not appear to have been considered.
In my opinion this has not been a well constructed plan and not enough effort has been made to consult with all stake holders. I would suggest that any proposals for this development be investigated to fully verify its soundness and compliance with all aspects.
3.1 If your representation is seeking a change, do you consider it necessary to participate in the oral part of the examination?
NO, I do not wish to participate at the oral examination
Please tick the box if you wish to be notified when the document is submitted, published and adopted.
Please notify me
2. Mrs Helen Storey, Pennington CE Primary School : 23 May 2012 17:33:00
Before completing this online representation please tick the box to show you have read the 'Guidance Notes for Making a Representation'
I have read the guidance notes
Policy/Site No.
LA1.3 Housing Allocations - All Swarthmoor sites
1.1 Do you consider that the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD is legally compliant?
Yes
2.1 Do you consider that the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD is sound?
No
2.2 If NO please identify which test of soundness your representation relates to by selecting the relevant option(s) below and completing section 2.3.
The DPD is not justified in that it is not founded on a robust and credible evidence base and/or is not considered the most appropriate strategy when considered against the reasonable alternatives.
2.3 Please give details of the change(s) you consider necessary to make the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD sound, having regard to the test you have identified at question 2.2 above.
It would be helpful if you could state your proposed change to the DPD and the reasons why you think it is necessary.
The document is not sound for a number of reasons but primarily it says in the guidance notes that there must be ‘evidence of participation of the local community and others having a stake in the area’.
Surely this would mean some form of communication/consultation with the local school and its community, ie Pennington CE Primary School. This has not happened at any stage. The school is a local service and amenity and provides a focal point for local children and parents and other community users. And, as a consequence of this floored procedure the whole school community has had no opportunity to participate in the process.
The proposed site falls within Pennington CE Primary School catchment area and at present, and for the foreseeable future, the school is almost full (203 on roll / capacity 210). 126 dwellings would bring in a considerable number of primary school age children. What is the proposal for allocating places to those children? The school buildings cannot take in any more children and the land on which the school stands has no room for building expansion. None of these issues has been addressed.
Under the same section it also refers to Research/fact finding – once again I would say that this has not been undertaken efficiently; within the planning document it refers to Pennington Junior School which it clearly is not – we are a Primary school and there is a significant difference. If this one simple piece of research has not been carried out correctly what other mistakes have been made.
Clearly no research/fact finding has been carried out regarding the impact on safety during peak traffic periods (particularly the beginning and end of the school day) at the Cross a Moor junction or along Cross a Moor itself. Traffic backs up from the school to the A590 and this would also impact on the proposed entrance to the site from Cross a Moor and cause even greater safety issues.
The suggestion that pedestrian facilities need to be provided on both sides of Cross a Moor would also create even greater parking and safety issues which do not appear to have been considered.
In my opinion this has not been a well constructed plan and not enough effort has been made to consult with all stake holders. I would suggest that any proposals for this development be investigated to fully verify its soundness and compliance with all aspects.
3.1 If your representation is seeking a change, do you consider it necessary to participate in the oral part of the examination?
NO, I do not wish to participate at the oral examination
Please tick the box if you wish to be notified when the document is submitted, published and adopted.
Please notify me
3. Mrs Helen Storey, Pennington CE Primary School : 23 May 2012 17:35:00
Before completing this online representation please tick the box to show you have read the 'Guidance Notes for Making a Representation'
I have read the guidance notes
Paragraph No.
1.9
1.1 Do you consider that the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD is legally compliant?
Yes
2.1 Do you consider that the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD is sound?
No
2.2 If NO please identify which test of soundness your representation relates to by selecting the relevant option(s) below and completing section 2.3.
The DPD is not justified in that it is not founded on a robust and credible evidence base and/or is not considered the most appropriate strategy when considered against the reasonable alternatives.
2.3 Please give details of the change(s) you consider necessary to make the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD sound, having regard to the test you have identified at question 2.2 above.
It would be helpful if you could state your proposed change to the DPD and the reasons why you think it is necessary.
The document is not sound for a number of reasons but primarily it says in the guidance notes that there must be ‘evidence of participation of the local community and others having a stake in the area’.
Surely this would mean some form of communication/consultation with the local school and its community, ie Pennington CE Primary School. This has not happened at any stage. The school is a local service and amenity and provides a focal point for local children and parents and other community users. And, as a consequence of this floored procedure the whole school community has had no opportunity to participate in the process.
The proposed site falls within Pennington CE Primary School catchment area and at present, and for the foreseeable future, the school is almost full (203 on roll / capacity 210). 126 dwellings would bring in a considerable number of primary school age children. What is the proposal for allocating places to those children? The school buildings cannot take in any more children and the land on which the school stands has no room for building expansion. None of these issues has been addressed.
Under the same section it also refers to Research/fact finding – once again I would say that this has not been undertaken efficiently; within the planning document it refers to Pennington Junior School which it clearly is not – we are a Primary school and there is a significant difference. If this one simple piece of research has not been carried out correctly what other mistakes have been made.
Clearly no research/fact finding has been carried out regarding the impact on safety during peak traffic periods (particularly the beginning and end of the school day) at the Cross a Moor junction or along Cross a Moor itself. Traffic backs up from the school to the A590 and this would also impact on the proposed entrance to the site from Cross a Moor and cause even greater safety issues.
The suggestion that pedestrian facilities need to be provided on both sides of Cross a Moor would also create even greater parking and safety issues which do not appear to have been considered.
In my opinion this has not been a well constructed plan and not enough effort has been made to consult with all stake holders. I would suggest that any proposals for this development be investigated to fully verify its soundness and compliance with all aspects.
3.1 If your representation is seeking a change, do you consider it necessary to participate in the oral part of the examination?
NO, I do not wish to participate at the oral examination
Please tick the box if you wish to be notified when the document is submitted, published and adopted.
Please notify me
