Object

Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy

Representation ID: 22146

Received: 15/03/2020

Respondent: Colin Dean

Representation Summary:

On behalf of the governors of Coltishall Primary School, I would like to offer our response to the Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan.

There is a general reference to there being sufficient land to expand (Coltishall Primary) school. The governors do not support this position and are strongly opposed to any expansion of the school. There are no acceptable ways to expand the school on a small scale to support the size of developments proposed. Additionally, large scale development would be detrimental to the school ethos and environment, and not in the interests of the children meaning that governors would not support any such proposal.

Full text:

As the Chair of Governors (and on behalf of the governors) for Coltishall Primary School I would like to submit the following response to the draft GNLP in regard to the sites in Coltishall.

We support the decision that the majority of the sites put forward in Coltishall and Horstead have been assessed to be unreasonable as we had significant concerns about the impact of capacity within the school and traffic in the vicinity of the school. We also acknowledge that the impact of traffic has been a deciding factor for some of these sites.

We are disappointed to see that there is a plan to include additional housing to the site at the end of Rectory Road. The governors are currently very concerned about capacity at the school. The school is typically oversubscribed and we are approaching levels where children who are resident within the catchment area will be unable to be accepted into the school. This is before any further development has been completed, so proposing to extend this development could result in a significant problem for the school. In addition to capacity, we also have significant concerns regarding traffic on Rectory Road. During school drop off and pick up times, Rectory Road is severely congested and already hazardous for children. Putting more development at the end of the road is only going to result in increased traffic and more difficulties on a narrow, unsuitable road.

As well as the site specific development, there is a general reference to there being sufficient land to expand the school. The governors do not support this position and are strongly opposed to any expansion of the school. There are no acceptable ways to expand the school on a small scale to support the size of developments proposed. Additionally, large scale development would be detrimental to the school ethos and environment, and not in the interests of the children meaning that governors would not support any such proposal.