Object

Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation

Representation ID: 7014

Received: 05/03/2019

Respondent: Mr David Phillips

Representation Summary:

I don't oppose the building of new houses on Arden traingle but do oppose the new school as it had a new block recently and is adequate. To build a school and then houses would double the length of construction time and have a greater impact. The safety of children walking to 5 schools is imperative- option 1 is least construction traffic and time. Another primary school isn't needed and would add to traffic as children out of catchment will fill places. Already a significant issue with parking and traffic which you are trying to address.

Full text:

I have lived in Dorridge for 37 years and attended Arden myself and my children have also attended here. I remember Dorridge before the development on Middlefield phase 1 and 2 and before the Four Ashes estate. I do not oppose the development of additional houses but I do object to the proposal to build a new school and then houses. The school had a new block in excess of a million pounds a few years ago and the site is adequate for the school's needs. It seems unnecessary to build a two new schools (secondary and primary) on the Arden triangle and then demolish the existing school to begin development of houses- thus two developments which would need to occur consecutively and could not happen simultaneously which would lead to a long period of development in this area (double what is necessary). It would be simpler and have significantly less impact on the area if the houses are built on the land and the school remains in its current location. It is imperative that the minimum amount of development occurs to ensure the safety of the children walking to school- to Arden from Knowle and Dorridge, to Knowle primary, Dorridge primary, Bentley Heath primary and St George and St Theresa. If you travel down Station Road and adjoining roads before school or at 3.35pm the volume of children on the pavements is striking and it is already dangerous. The development option that is approved should be that which produces the minimum amount of construction traffic to place no additional risk to the children travelling to school. If the houses are developed on the land on the Arden triangle then this would place the least risk to the children and young people.
Additionally, the current primary schools are able to accommodate children form the catchment and offer places from outside the catchment area, therefore a new primary school is not needed. There are other potential options to extend the number of places in the current four primary schools in this small area and there is a higher proportion of children attending private schools in this area so not all children take up a state school place. There are not other places in the Borough which have five primary schools of this size in such a small area (8 form entry currently per year group). The volume of traffic produced by this number of pupils in such a small area adds to the already high risk to the safety of the children walking to and from school. As an authority you are actively promoting healthy living, part of which is the push for children to walk to school- therefore you have a responsibility to ensure the children's safety if they do this. You have recently taken steps to address the issue of parking and have commented as a council on the concerns around safety on Station Road in particular and you have ceased the provision of the crossing attendants to save money. If you create a new primary school in this area then children are likely to travel from outside the catchment area to fill the places and this again increases the volume of traffic. It is imperative that the different council departments liaise to gain a thorough understanding of the area and the issues faced.