Joint statement regarding the proposed development
The Headteacher, Governing Body and Parents’ Group of Moortown Primary School would like to clarify what their joint position is on their requests for the development of the field at the rear of the school:
We would like a safe and secure area adjacent to the current school boundary that is appropriate for sports and outdoor activity of varying kinds. Ideally this would be for exclusive use of the school and not open to the public.
However, a further option would be that the area is available for the exclusive use of the school weekdays from 8 – 5pm including holidays (as required) to support our out of school activity programme (much of which would be open to all children within the area).
We do not specifically want a marked out pitch and we certainly do not want an open marked pitch in the middle of the park as this is not secure and still has the safeguarding implications that most of the objections to planning have already raised.
This position has been stated by various representatives of the school and the Parents’ Group at various meetings; it has not changed.
Headteacher’s objections to field planning proposal
Today is the deadline to lodge a supporting or objecting comment regarding the proposals for the field at the rear of school.
- Go to Leeds City Council planning site
- Type the reference number 14/01839 or enter Allerton Grove into the search field.
- Click on the Comments tab. You’ll need to register so that you can make comments.
This is the comment I have lodged which objects to the plans. The objection is now within the public domain so I have simply reproduced the objection below. (Please note: I have not published this on the Leeds planning site or here up until now in order to avoid trying to unduly influence parents / carers; however, my role in school is also to represent the interests of our children and our future children, therefore I feel I need to represent their views.)
I am headteacher of Moortown Primary School. I object to the Reserved Matters application on the following basis:
Referring to the ‘Guidance on information requirements and validation’ document (Department for Communities and Local Government, March 2010), points 114, 115, 137, 145 and 150 do not appear to have been followed. For example: point 114: “Design and Access Statements explain proposals already set out in the planning application, but they also set out the principles and concepts that will be used when that proposal is developed in the future. In particular, for outline planning permission, applicants and local planning authorities should consider how they will ensure the relevant parts of the statement are adhered to for the drawing up and assessment of future details.”
There is no clear link or adherence between the original documents submitted that lead to the outline planning permission being granted and the resulting planning permission and related S106 agreement.
The previous application submissions made reference to specific amenities to be available to Moortown Primary School but this has not been included in the Section 106 agreement or the subsequent Reserved Matters application.
How has Leeds Council Planning Department gone from the original submission documents to a legal document which seems to, under the Section 106 agreement paragraph 6.1, specifically exclude use of part of the field by the school?
In the original Design and Access Statement, there was a great deal of explicit reference to the school (including the landscaping documents); in the one submitted with the Reserve Matters Application, such references have virtually disappeared. Comments from parents / carers of Moortown Primary pupils demonstrate that had this not been included from the start of the process, many further objections would have been raised at this early stage. Additionally, my understanding is that the case officer would have relied upon the original Design and Access Statement when making recommendations to approve, but the Reserved Matters document is not consistent with this.
The S106 documents sets out that Leeds Council would adopt the park, but with a restriction on its use as anything other than a public park. Given the explicit references to enhanced facilities at Moortown Primary School set out in original documentation and Delegation Report (which led to the permission being granted and which, in particular, refers to potential future provision for the school in the area) , I struggle to see how this limitation was included.
Because the Section 106 agreement came after public consultation on the application documents, and which feature amenities for the specific use of Moortown Primary, has correct policy and procedures been followed?
Further, I’m not entirely convinced that other guidance has been followed in a way which is transparent and comprehensive in relation to appraise the context. Guidance notes state: “It is important that an applicant should understand the context in which their proposal will sit, and use this understanding to draw up the application.” and that a particular process should be followed. However:
Assessment of the site’s immediate and wider context has not to the best of my knowledge incorporated on-site observations at a time which would demonstrate that the field is used regularly by Moortown Primary pupils, and no planning representative from the council has consulted me to aid this assessment.
Involvement of both community members and professionals has been undertaken, but again, there has not been any consultation with me. This would appear to have led to inaccuracies in the Delegation Report of the Chief Planning Officer: Points 10.6 and 10.13 state the pitch is unused for ten years, but in reality, the site is used currently on a weekly basis (minimum) as a playing field, and has been used for over thirty years. Point 10.7 states the playing fields being lost would be replaced by a playing field of equivalent or better quality, but this fails to account for safeguarding issues: currently, Moortown Primary pupils use the site with a degree of safety as it is fenced off, yet the proposals set out complete public access, thereby undermining any claims for better quality.
Evaluation of the information collected on the site’s context, leading to balancing any potentially conflicting issues that have been identified, might be said to be questionable since existing conflict remains yet a compromise can be made. Moortown Primary seek a portion of land for the school’s full and permanent use; we are, however, prepared to seek compromise such as a dedicated area, fenced, for our use during specified hours ie a compromise can be found. To sum up, and to quote council guidance notes again: “Understanding a development’s context is vital to producing good design” – better consultation with Moortown Primary School and all stakeholders from the outset would allow that.
The S106 Agreement should be changed to reflect the principles set out in the original Design and Access Statement provided within the original outline application. To do so would mean greater space and opportunities for children at Moortown Primary, and children from the wider community through our extended schools programme of activities, to engage in competitive sport and other physical activity, thereby meeting the local agendas (becoming a Child-Friendly City; reducing health-related problems) and the national agenda (increasing physical activity and competitive sport). Ideally, the school wants sufficient dedicated space as has been said throughout the planning process and in meetings with planners, Children’s Services and councillors; dedicated space for the school during specified hours, and then the same space open to the public out of hours and in holidays, is a compromise for all stakeholders.
Owls in Moortown Primary
As part of our nocturnal animals mini topic, we had some nocturnal visitors in the first week back after Easter. Five different owls came to see us and we even got to hold them! Two barn owls, two eagle owls and a snowy owl took to the stage and we learnt all about them. Here are some things we found out.
- Owls have two ears; one on top of their head and one on the bottom. This is so they can hear prey and know if something is above trying to catch them.
- Owls create a nest in stones on the ground so that their eggs won’t roll away.
- There are five types of owl in Britain; these are the barn owl, long-eared owl, short-eared owl, tawny owl and the little owl.
- Amazingly, owls can turn their heads 270 degrees! This helps because they can’t move their eyes side to side like we can.
09 May 2014
This week we will be going back over our ten times table.
Lots of us are familiar with this so make sure you learn division facts as well; for example:
- 2 x 10 = 20, so…
- 20 ÷ 10 = 2
09 May 2014
This week marks the start of our final big topic of Year 2 – ‘Oh I do like to be beside the seaside’.
I can show what happens at the seaside.
This is creative homework so think about what different things you cold do to show all of the different things that happen at the seaside.
You could…
- Make a brochure
- Create a slideshow
- Draw a map of a seaside
- Write a story
- Interview different people you might meet there
Friday is the last day to comment on plans for the field…
…so please don’t leave it too long if you support or object to the plans.
- Go to Leeds City Council planning site: https://publicaccess.leeds.gov.uk/online-applications/
- Type the reference number 14/01839 or enter Allerton Grove into the search field.
- Click on the Comments tab. You’ll need to register so that you can make comments.
It doesn’t take long to register, but it does take a while for these log-in details to take effect, so don’t leave it until the last minute.
So far, there are 20 objections, 19 of which cite factors relating to the school’s needs as a key reason. Here some of the comments made so far:
The Reserved Matters include detailed designs for the Urban Park which now exclude any reference to the sports pitch for the use by Moortown Primary School.
The Delegation Report for the Outline Application refers to the sports pitch in the following item:
10.14 [quote from Delegation Report is made here]
10.15 [quote from Delegation Report is made here]
This shows that officers were including the future provision of a formal sporting ground which could be used by the school as part of the reasons they were recommending it be approved.
All through the consultation with the school and local community the provision of this sports pitch for the use of the school was of highest importance as highlighted in the developer’s design and access statement.
14 April
My objection is based on the following points:-
1. All previous application submissions to this point have made reference to specific amenities being made available to Moortown Primary School, however this has not been included in the Section 106 agreement or the subsequent Reserved Matters application. Had this not been included from the start of the process then further objections would have been raised.
2. The existing use of the land by the school for sporting activity over many years will be lost due to the landscaping that is included in the application.
3. The school is looking to preserve existing rights, not improve them. As the new park will be public this will require a secure area being provided, and this provision is completely absent in the current proposal.
4. The current proposal goes against the National Planning Framework which aims to uphold a good standard of amenity for all existing occupiers. This is clearly not the case as these proposals provide no allocated space for the school.
02 May, second objection listed on this date
As a resident of Moortown I strongly object to this planning application. In the outline planning application all parties were led to believe that there would be space and amenities available for Moortown Primary children to access, subsequently at this point I had no objection as I do not oppose the small development of houses or the park. However, at this point it has become clear that this was not accurate information and that actually the children will not be given any green space to use. The suggestion that they use a public park is ludicrous, safeguarding is paramount and the children of the school need to continue to be educated in an environment that they feel safe in.
The children have been using the current amenities for many established years, this means that the school is not asking for something they never had, they are asking for their rights to be upheld and the children’s access to outdoor space to continue. It is simply a request to preserve the little the school already has.
There is an opportunity here to teach the next generation about healthy eating as they grow their own produce, the importance of exercise, team sports and the great outdoors and it seems archaic to be taking these away from children in the current obesity crisis that this country is in.
02 May, second objection listed on this date
In addition, Sport England has lodged a statutory objection.
There are some comments in support, too; all these come from Moortown Community Group in one overall letter of support. Some of the points they support are below:
Much thought has been given to the tree planting… The children’s play area is particularly appealing… We agree that this park will make a contribution to Leeds as a child friendly city but there are also many older people living nearby who may prefer some quieter corners for sitting…
Because the comments are available in a different format on the Leeds City Council planning (case file) website, full comments are not as easily quoted here, hence a link to the full letter from Moortown Community Group is made here.
02 May 2014
This week’s homework is practice makes perfect.
For the last couple of days, we’ve been learning about weight and units of measurement. For homework, I would like the children to look around the kitchen cupboards to see the variety of different weights recorded on the packets. If they want to do a bit more, then they could weigh the packets to make sure the recorded weight is correct. They know that 1000 grams is the same as 1 kilogram so it would be useful to refer to this in your discussion when they are doing their homework.
Homework is due in on Wednesday 07 May.
02 May 2014
Here are this week’s spellings. Please note that the spelling test will be on Thursday 08 May.
Red Group |
Yellow Group |
Green Group |
cake |
treasure |
bubble |
spade |
television |
puddle |
made |
pleasure |
little |
make |
measure |
fiddle |
scrape |
usual |
middle |
tale |
what |
bottle |
whale |
when |
gaggle |
tame |
little |
giggle |
there |
juggle |
|
were |
gobble |
02 May 2014
The spellings this week all contain the ending sion. You’ll notice that this ending makes the same ‘shun’ sound as last week’s spellings.
Can you also spot the words which have a double up for a short vowel sound?
1. | passion |
2. | mission |
3. | division |
4. | confusion |
5. | discussion |
6. | invasion |
7. | explosion |
8. | conclusion |
9. | revision |
10. | aggression |
02 May 2014
This week’s homework is practice makes perfect and is due in on Wednesday 07 May.
I can answer questions about a text.
I’d like the children to carefully read the text they have been given and answer the questions – this will test their comprehension skills as well as reading. This is a great way to ensure your child is understanding what they’re reading whilst building on skills we’ve learnt throughout the year so far.