Brentwood Council's planning department has been accused of ruining an opportunity to resolve serious road safety concerns outside a primary school at no expense to the taxpayer.
Iain Gunn, headteacher of St Peter’s School in South Weald, has reacted angrily to the authority’s stance over plans to provide 89 car parking spaces close by to the school – essentially removing the need for parents and children to walk along the narrow Wigley Bush Lane to their parked cars.
In a letter to parents, he said there had been a solution to the school’s parking issues by which a sporting village and clay pigeon club, that has been awarded planning consent, were going to provide a free car park connected to the school grounds via a new footpath.
The school has said the facility would have been fully funded and would have been its to use for years to come.
Mr Gunn has said that despite the support of local councillors, residents, and highways, the application was deemed not to be compliant with conditions around the use of the sporting village.
He said the council has insisted that the members of the public using the car park should not be allowed to use the sporting village which comes with a condition as a private members club.
Mr Gunn has said an unwillingness to risk a breach of the conditions the council has insisted on surrounding the sporting village has ultimately led to the project’s demise.
He said in a letter to parents: “The issue was not the car park itself - there was no problem with this.
"The issue was a minor change that had to be made to the conditions so that parents could use the site.
"The planner decided that this was not reasonable so withdrew the application. This has resulted in the car park scheme being withdrawn.
“The benefits of this facility would far outweigh any detrimental impact of non-members being able to use the on-site shop.
"The council’s stock line is that they have been in full communication with the school and that we are the ones being unreasonable as we will not reapply without the conditions.
“The reality is the communication has been appalling and the person paying for the car park will not do it without the minor conditions being removed. This now leaves us without a free safe parking facility.”
He claimed last week there were four near misses including one where a four-year-old was almost hit by a car while walking on the pavement.
He added that the council’s insistence the sporting village shop must come with conditions preventing members of the public from using it means the car park will not go ahead.
Speaking to the LDRS he added: “You’ve got to look in terms of my view in terms of planning. The green belt issues are not the issue. What they are saying is they’re going to be loads of cars there because if our parents can come and use the café other people can use the country shop to buy a hat or whatever.
“Now how many people are going to be doing that compared to the chaos outside my school that is going to be averted by having a car park there?”
He added: “I am incredibly disappointed and disillusioned with the whole process. I would have hoped somebody would have seen common sense rather than saying absolutely no. This has been going on for a year, there has been very little communication and very little support.
“The planning department will not let it go to the local councillors. Who isn’t going to think this isn’t an amazing idea?
“We have a really easy solution that keeps the children safe that isn’t going to cost taxpayers any money at all and is going to be there for generations. And because they don’t like the small print this isn’t happening.”
Mr Gunn has urged parents to write to the council highlighting their concerns. Parents have also backed the headteacher.
Parent Emma Dowie said: “We desperately need more parking. It’s very unsafe. The road is unsafe. The children are constantly nearly getting knocked down by cars. The fact that it’s not being looked at as a really important matter is quite disappointing.”
Josie McAleer, with children aged four and six, added: “It’s so unsafe for the children. Halfway down it gets too narrow."
Haki Barmeta, parent of a five-year-old, said: “I believe the school has the kids’ health and safety at the heart of it."
A letter to councillors from senior officer Emma Goodings said the “incorrect legislative route” had been followed regarding a section 73 amendment application on the previously approved application for the sporting village.
She said: “Officers advised withdrawal of the s73 and submission of a full planning application. However, the applicant chose not to take this advice.
“The council, therefore, commissioned legal advice which set out that what was proposed was beyond the scope of what could be considered by a s73 application. This was checked with senior colleagues at our legal advisors who all concurred.
“It was considered therefore that the council had a s73 which it could not lawfully make a decision on. As such the s73 was formally disposed of on August 12.
“This essentially means the council will make no determination on it. The applicant’s agent was of course fully informed of this and officers have also had conversations with the school headteacher.
“We have not yet had a full application in to consider and the original clay pigeon shooting facility approval remains in place and is able to be implemented.
“Officers have also reiterated to the school that we are happy to work with themselves and Essex County Council on a solution to their drop-off concerns.”
Jonathan Stephenson, chief executive of Brentwood Council, said: “In relation to the planning issue, I can confirm that the council has not received a valid planning application for it to consider.
“If the council does receive the necessary planning application, it will of course consider it.
“The council did receive an application from a neighbouring landowner to vary the conditions on an existing planning application which proposed a range of changes to their existing planning permission.
“This included an increase in car parking but was only part of it and these were not matters that could be considered as a variation of the conditions. The council did seek independent legal advice on this.
“The council has advised the applicant’s professional planning agent as well as the headteacher to explain the position and what they needed to do if they wished to progress the proposals and make a planning application.
“This was first advised in September 2023. However, to date, an application has not been submitted. If the council does receive the appropriate application, the timescale for the decision is eight weeks.
“More broadly, the highway network and its impact on the safety of pedestrians and vehicles around the school is enforced and controlled by Essex County Council. Only they can make any changes to the network including restricting vehicles or widening pavements.
“Brentwood Borough Council have, and continue to, encourage the school and the landowner to enter into meaningful engagement with both Essex County Council and Brentwood Borough Council to consider proposals for an acceptable planning and highway resolution to the school’s parking situation.”
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here