Appendix J: Document collating the representations received to the Statutory Proposals, arranged by school.
Various Schools/ general comments
1.
2.
Brentside Primary School
1. We are writing to object to the proposal to massively increase the capacity of Brentside Primary School. The school and its existing resources currently meet the needs of its pupils well yet no clear benefits are set out in the proposed plan. In particular we are concerned about how safe drop off and collection could be achieved with increased numbers and reduced playground space, how safety and quality of local environment can be assured despite extra traffic and car parking, and how the council proposes to justify the loss of music resources and communal space which currently have a clear and positive impact on the well being, esteem and achievement of pupils. Furthermore the extensive rebuilding works are likely to be detrimental to the health of asthmatic pupils such as our son. Involvement and participation of parents has been non-existent prior to a school letter dated 16th January informing families of Ealing Council’s statutory notice. We received no information during the alleged consultation period April-May 2008, during which time our son was in nursery at Brentside. Deciding upon a suitable school is a significant long term commitment and information regarding these plans should have been made available. We fail to understand how the cooperation and support of parents is expected when information sharing has been minimal. We understand the challenge to be met by the council in securing primary school places for a growing population but do not believe Brentside and the local area suitable or able to accommodate the intended level development.
2.
3. I would like to put on record my objection to the proposal to enlarge Brentside Primary School, Hanwell. I currently have a son in ……….. at the school.
I feel strongly that the school does not have sufficient space to increase its capacity in the way proposed by the London Borough of Ealing, and that the quality of school-life of the students would be adversely affected.
The proposal includes building new blocks on existing playground space and then doubling the number of pupils using the playgrounds. I strongly believe that outside play is essential to the healthy development of our children - especially with current concerns about obesity and sedentary lifestyles - and that this would be severely compromised.
I am concerned about doubling the number of parents dropping their children off at school. This would be an issue even if everyone came on foot - there is only one, relatively narrow, entrance to the school and this would become very congested. However, there is already a problem with parents who come by car and park either on school markings or on the pavement near the school. This makes crossing roads - and even walking along the pavement - dangerous. Presumably, increasing the number of children attending the school would mean drawing children from further afield than is currently the case. This would inevitably mean a large increase in traffic and parking problems around the school.
Whilst I understand the council intends to create new classroom blocks to accommodate the increase in pupils (though this in itself is not without knock-on effects - see above), there are many facilities other than simply classrooms and toilets which make Brentside a successful school. I am not aware of any planned enlargement of facilities such as IT suites, music or drama areas, literacy or art areas. These are all important facilities in the development of 'rounded' individuals, and presumably each child - under the council's proposals - would only have 50% as much opportunity to benefit from them as currently, as twice as many children would be using them.
I strongly believe Brentside Primary school does an excellent job in developing its pupils both academically and non-academically. I understand this is one of the reasons the council wishes to increase its intake. However, I have strong concerns that it would not be able to do this as successfully with such a major increase in student numbers. Brenside draws its students from areas which are not particularly affluent, and has students with difficult backgrounds. I know the staff prides itself on being able to give a chance to all its pupils and to take the time to understand individual needs and circumstances when things go wrong. I am always impressed that staff-members - teaching and non-teaching - remember not only my son (who is a pupil) but also myself and my young daughter (who will - I hope - be a pupil in the future). I don't see how they could maintain such personal care of students and parents if there were twice as many. Therefore, I don't see how they could hope to give each student such a good chance at success as they do currently (although I'm sure they would try).
I understand the council's predicament, with the shortfall in school places and the increasing birthrate. However, I cannot believe Brentside - with such limited space available, and a catchment including children with real need for individual care and attention - can be the best choice for enlargement.
4.
Fielding Primary
1. I am writing to object to the proposal of Fielding being a 4 form entry school. I have been a parent at that school since 1999 and have noticed it's deterioration over that time since going from a 2 form to 3 form school. Since that time there have been huge changes some positive and some hugely negative. These are some of my opinions and concerns based on my previous experience with the last increase in capacity
The school is completely impersonal now and it feels like you are entering a prison as opposed to a school
Pastoral care has declined. There is a very impersonal feel about the school - more like a secondary than a primary school.
Traffic has increased at school drop offs and pick ups. There have been numerous near misses in recent years. Even though tables and yellow lines have been introduced the roads are very busy and dangerous at certain times of the day. What do the local authority propose to prevent an accident occurring?
The facilities (hall, canteen) of the school have not increased. Consequently lunchtimes are fraught and busy. My son (who is …… ) currently has his lunch at 11.30 and is always starving at the end of the day. It also appears that he does not always have the opportunity to finish his lunch as the next year group is waiting to come into the dining hall. Assemblies now involve 90 children so they have less opportunities to be involved and are probably daunted by their huge audience. How will the school ensure that all children get the opportunity to perform?
There has been a high staff turnover and staff appear to be more stressed.
Bullying has become more an issue as children get lost within the system
The disruption of the building work also concerns me. How will children be able to concentrate with building works going on?
I have been hugely saddened by the news that Fielding may go to a larger school as I believe it can only effect the school and community negatively. I can only imagine a 4 year old joining reception being completely intimidated by being one of 120 children after attending a small preschool environment. I am disappointed that the governors have supported the expansion without consulting the parents. I thought they were supposed to be a voice for theparents.
Thank you for taking the time to read this.
2. I am parent of a child currently attending this school. Having attended a presentation at the school last night setting out the proposal to expand the admissions to 4 forms of entry from 2009 I would like to make you aware of my strong support for the proposed expansion of the school.
The Chair of Governors and Head Teacher made a compelling case for enlarging the school to support the needs of the local community. There is clearly a strong management team in place at the school that can succeed in making the building programme as painless as possible for the students and local community, whilst also being able to gain maximum benefit from the enlarged and improved facilities that will result. I am also very pleased to see that the plan retains the excellent sports field at the school. The high standard of education my daughter is currently receiving at the school should be made available to all children in the catchment area and so I am keen for the school to expand to be able to deliver this.
I do have concerns about the increased traffic in the local area and I hope that the Council will make suitable changes to the traffic measures in the area to put a stop to parents driving their children to and from school. The residents in the surrounding streets who attended the meeting were very vocal about the existing problems (which I also see when I take my daughter to school) and their support for the plan will not be won over without the Council making a convincing case as to how this will be addressed. This was not done in the presentation last night and the Council needs to urgently engage the Transport team in setting out how this will be done.
I hope the Council will support the enlargement of the school,whilst also safeguarding the local residents from inceased traffic problems.
3. I am writing to object to the proposal to expand Fielding primary school. My house backs directly onto the school and the increase in noise,parked cars and traffic will cause me severe disruption. Despite the small area of the catchment a large number of parents already drop their children off by car. This will increase substantially with a 33% increase in pupils. The noise from the playground has increased significantly since the last expansion of Fielding - 33% more pupils will mean 33% more noise. I also object to their plan to extend the present single storey extension at the Midhurst Rd end of the school to a two storey extension which will affect my light and my privacy. Reading your document I notice that you claim to have already held a widespread public consultation. This is not true. You did not consult neighbours - if you had I would have objected sooner. Four forms of entry is far too large for a primary school, particularly in such a built up area as this. If you really do need more school places you should open new schools, otherwise what will happen when you need to expand again - 6 forms of entry? A primary school the size of a high school? I cannot believe that parents want that and I understand from parents at the school that they have already submitted a petition against expansion.
4. I'd like to share my views on the expansion of Fielding Primary School.
My son will be entering nursery (hopefully at Fielding) in 2010 but I am strongly opposed to the expansion of the school. It is already one of the biggest schools in the borough & I feel the standards will drop if it gets any bigger. Also the proposal of opening a new entrance in Fielding Walk is outrageous as it's the only little area that local residents have to walk the dogs or have a peaceful, quiet walk.
I think that other schools with a lower form of entry in the area eg. Oaklands, Mt Carmel or St Marks should be expanded.
The council should think about building new schools in place of housing developments of which Ealing already has too many.
Areas such as Blondin Park which drug users and dealers are using for their activities should be used for building a new school
5. I would like to formally register my opposition to the proposed expansion of Fielding School to a four form entry from Sept 2009.
I attended the open day for parents and local residents which was held at the school on the evening of the 26/1/09. Very short notice of this meeting was given, and of the alternative drop in sessions mentioned on the invitation letter, one had an incorrect time given.
The arguments for expansion presented at the meeting by the current head and the assistant director of education - Gary Redhead - were badly presented, dismissive of criticism and seemed to focus on the notion that the only way to address the lack of capital investment at the school was to expand it to a four form entry. That in itself was a illogical argument and I received no direct answers to my questions about capital programme funding. The handouts provided by the head outlining the proposed building works were unreadable - they were poor reproductions on six power point slides to a page. They were hardly any more readable when projected. This was either amateurish or deliberately evasive when what in effect was being proposed, was a major building project which is clearly going to impact on local residents. The fact that part of the school is proposed to be increased in height was simply mentioned at some point as an afterthought. When questioned by some residents from Midhurst Road that this would affect some peoples light seriously, the answer we received was 'Very probably'. This was frankly insulting as was the fact there way was no mention of the fact that the Midhurst Road playground was proposed to be turned into a builders compound for the more than a year.
The meeting was over two hours long.The vast majority of comments made were critical and we will be writing to Mr Redhead separately to ensure that an accurate record of the meeting was kept. I did not see him making adequatenotes. For the record however, issues which were raised but to which no real answers were given were:
* What is the basis of the demographics that require an expansion of school places?
* In the proposal to transfer the Green Man Lane estate to an RSL, what is in that brief with respect tot he school on that site?
* How many children in each year group currently attending Fielding are out of catchment area?
* What plans are there to ease the currently horrendous traffic problems around the school?
* What will be the impact on residents of the building work - Fielding has an awful record of consulting with residents over works?.
* What about the light issue for residents in Midhurst Road?
* Does a huge school with over 900 children have a place in a tightly packed area of Edwardian housing?
* With 900 plus pupils, Fielding will be one of the largest 20 primary schools in London. How can the ethos of the place be maintained and do the other schools of such a size have more space?
In summary, I oppose the expansion on a number of levels, and nothing was said at the public meeting which assured me otherwise. I work in senior level in for a neighbouring local authority and I have to say that the quality of the presentations made was very poor and insulted a lot of peoples intelligence and experience.
6. I live in Ridley Avenue backing on to Fielding Walk, and just wanted to have my views registered regarding the proposed expansion of Fielding Primary School.
I attended the consultation evening held on Monday 26 Jan, and am pleased to see that the council is taking action to prepare for the projected increase in demand for primary school places. I was also impressed by the invitation of local residents to the consultation evening, giving us a chance to hear about the plans and ask any questions.
I am satisfied that the school and council are working to keep disruption to a minimum, and although some minor disruption (noise, traffic, etc.) is inevitable, I can't see any way of completely avoiding it.
On balance, I would much rather that the children in Northfields should be able to attend a local Primary School than having to commute every day at such a young age, and if the price to pay for that is a little disruption for a few years in our area then so be it. It makes more sense to expand an existing school than build a new one (so long as the existing school does not suffer as a result of the expansion, see concerns below) - as more children can benefit from improved facilities and the shared expertise of a larger number of teaching staff. Once it has been decided to expand an existing school rather than build a new one, it makes sense to expand a school where places are most in demand, and it seems that, on this basis, Fielding Primary is an appropriate choice.
I only have two concerns about the plans. First and foremost is that the school be given the necessary support to be able to keep up its currently outstanding provision of teaching and care for its children, even with the increased number of classes. Secondly, if a new school entrance is built opening onto Fielding Walk, then I am concerned about the children's safety as there is currently no lighting there, so on winter days when it is dark that could pose a problem.
I note there are some residents who are opposed to the plans (and I received a rather inflammatory letter through my door last night suggesting that everyone express their concerns to yourself and our local councillors), but as long as the points above are properly addressed and enough care is taken to avoid as far as possible any undue disruption to the area, then I am definitely in favour of the scheme.
7. My husband, …………..and I would like to express our formal opposition to the enlargement proposals on the grounds of over-development of the site, which is completel surrounded by houses.
I would also be obliged if you could furnish me with the following figures:
1) Number of pupils within the catchment area of the school refused admission in September 2007, 2008 and likely to be refused in September 2009.
2) Number of spare places at any of the the neighbouring schools - Oaklands, Little Ealing, St Marks, St John's and Grange.
3) Total number of available places in Ealing primary schools in September 2008 and total number of places taken up in September 2008.
4) Projected numbers of places required in 2009 and 2010 and number of places currently available without this enlargement.
Thank you in anticipation of the receipt of these figures.
8. Both of my children went through Fielding and are now at local secondary schools. Over supscription for Reception places was always a problem, children with entitlement were not necessarily given a place. This obviously is wrong. However, by the end of Year 2, classes in the past were not full. My younger …….. left year 6 in 2006, she belonged to a class in the low 20's. The two other classes had similar numbers. Of those in the year group, not all children lived in catchment. I would be interested to know whether or not the Key Stage 2 numbers are still less than those lower down the school, and whether or not, all children live within catchment. It seems that parents are keen to get their children into the school and then for whatever reason, move out of the area, or move to schools within the area. The propoals seem to me to be extreme. This is an area with traffic and parking issues. If the school is able to expand to this extent, the problems will increase (especially if out of catchment children are being driven in.) In any case though, it seems senseless to expand if the school is considerably less than full in Key Stage 2, or if numbers are made up partly through children who are not attending their local schools.
9.
I wish to support the above proposal to enlarge Fieldings as I agree we are heading for an educational crisis in the Borough. We have lived in Ealing for 20 years and therefore are not transient workers residing in the Borough for a relatively short time. We would also point out that we have a long term investment in the Borough as home owners and have dutifully paid our Council tax for all this time.
Now that we have a ……. who is due to start school shortly, we thinkwe deserve every chance of finding her a place in our nearest school (Fieldings). We therefore welcome your consultation and hope it is passed.
10. As local residents, we have been recently informed by more knowledgeable neighbours about the proposed expansion of Fielding Primary School. It is also our understanding that Ealing Council is holding consultations and inviting views. Whilst these views will be varied and in the most part will be objecting to these proposals, we would like to offer our views, particularly around parking and the traffic movement.
We have been resident in the area for 16 years and occupy the house ………………. Not unsurprisingly over that length of time there has been a marked increase in traffic, particularly around school opening and closing times. Additionally, in that time, there have been parking restrictions applied at both entrances to the school and a safety zone built immediately outside of our house.
As part of the consultation process, we would like you to consider the following points: a.. The introduction of controlled parking zones in the streets in the south- east section of the school a number of years ago has exacerbated the parking problems in the other streets around the school b.. Free street parking is liberally used by school staff from 08:00 onwards, occupying resident spaces and many of these are not freed up until late in the day c.. The restricted parking zone outside our house, designed primarily for children's safety, is frequently used as a taxi waiting service by inconsiderate parents/guardians at drop off/pickup times d.. The entrance to our garage on a lowered pavement in Wyndham Road is constantly blocked, again by inconsiderate parents/guardians at drop off/pickup times e.. The introduction of extra-curricular music lessons at the school means that there is constant traffic/noise in the area on Saturday mornings. This occurs every hour, when the children are either being picked up from or dropped off for lessons. f.. Insufficient space for cars to pass each other, slowing traffic movement in the area and results in cars being held up in the safety zone Our suggestions to improve the situation are as follows: a.. Provision of adequate staff parking within the school grounds (if practical) b.. Controlled residents parking to be introduced in the streets around Fielding School, preferably Mon-Fri between 08:00-09:30 and 15:00-16:30 and Sat 09:00-12:00 during term time c.. Double yellow lines around the corners of the surrounding streets - Northcroft Road into Wyndham Road is a notoriously bad corner for parking d.. Turn Wyndham Road into a one way, from west to east direction e.. Turn Claygate Road into a one way, from east to west direction f.. CCTV or warden monitor the safety zones on Northcroft Road and Midhurst Road to penalise persistent offenders that are compromising the safety of children g.. Provide the residents with a comprehensive plan for school expansion across the borough, explaining which other options are under consideration. This being the 2nd expansion at Fielding Primary School in our time here, there are obvious concerns that it will always be cheaper to upgrade a school that has previously had significant investment thus exacerbating the above problems. We are happy to discuss any of the above further, if required.
11. We are writing to protest about the proposed enlargement of Fielding Primary School to accommodate 840 children by the year 2016.
Our objections are based on the traffic problems that the transportation of such large numbers of children will engender in what is a essentially a residential area. Considerable traffic chaos already exists because of the twice daily influx of cars in narrow residential streets and an additional 210 children will generate further cars and even more traffic chaos in the area.
If a substantial number of additional primary school places are required in the borough, then serious consideration should be given to building a new primary school in a green field site.
12. I am contacting you to express my concerns about the proposed expansion of Fielding Primary School on the grounds that this will have significant adverse effects on the residential area into which the school is already tightly packed. I understand that you are inviting comments about this proposal up until 13 February.
I am a resident of Wyndham Road (No …. ), and my house is very close to the Wyndham Road entrance of Fielding Primary School. This entrance is used by parents and children on foot, but also nearly exclusively by those travelling to and from school by car, because there are parking restrictions in the immediate vicinity of the only other school entrance in Coombe Road/Northcroft Road.
As you will be aware, Wyndham Road is a relatively narrow street which is densely-parked and relatively busy with cut-through traffic throughout the day. Motor and pedestrian traffic near my home is exceptionally high during school opening hours, which include evenings and Saturdays, and as there are *no resident-only parking bays*, it is often impossible for me to park anywhere near my house. Around 9am and 3.30pm on weekdays, it is even sometimes difficult for me to get out of my front gate because of the crush of parents and children going to and coming from the school!
As a retired ………………….. who is often at home during school hours, I am therefore already significantly inconvenienced by the close proximity of my house to a large, very busy school. The prospect of the school expanding further, eventually by approximately one third more pupils, leaves me very concerned about the adverse effects that this will have on the neighbourhood in general and on my personal quality of life in particular.
In addition to the increased number of children and parents attending the school, I understand that a large amount of associated building work will be carried out over several years, including at weekends. Undoubtedly, this will add to the woes of local residents such as myself.
In summary therefore, I believe that the likely adverse effects on the local neighbourhood and environment of this proposed expansion should result in its being abandoned.
13. We are writing in complete opposition to the proposed expansion of our neighbouring school, Fielding Primary, Wyndham Road, West Ealing. Our main concerns with the proposed expansion include
Increased activity (foot traffic & vehicle traffic) in our street and our neighbouring Fielding Walk. This is already at maximum capacity because of St Paul’s Church. Increased noise from building work, we have had to endure and currently still are enduring building noise from the expansion to the St Paul’s Hall Increased noise in our street and our neighbouring Fielding Walk. Currently we contend with a lot of noise both from the school and the local St Paul’s Church all through the week and most weekends as they both offer weekend activities. Difficulty parking outside our own home. Parking outside our own property proves very difficult at all times except during the 2x1 hour ‘resident’ periods.
Being a Nursery Teacher myself (in another borough) I am well aware of the difficulties of finding school places for children. However, I still strongly disagree with the expansion of this school. Only 7 years ago it was expanded to accommodate more places, where will it end?
From my own personal experience of working in an school that was expanded 4 years ago I worked next to and practically in a building site for over a year and a half. I am therefore well aware of how continuous expansion of a school is not always the best answer and in the best interests to the children and families using the facility. Increased numbers of children, increased number of staff etc… changes the dynamics, vision and philosophy of an already established school dramatically in my opinion for the worse.
Rather than jeopardise Fielding Primary’s close intimate community feel, increase foot and vehicle traffic, increase noise and parking issues for residents who have already endured (and will continue to endure) more than enough of these issues through the activities (week & weekend) of the existing school, the local community hall, St Paul’s Church and the St Paul’s Church Hall (where building expansion is in progress currently, doubling its size and we have no idea what effects this will have on our street once fully functional) Instead I feel the council needs to consider a new school to accommodate West Ealing’s popularity and expanding young population.
In summary as residents of the surrounding area of Fielding Primary we are wholly opposed to the proposal of expanding it.
14. I understand that I am to write to you with any objections to the above proposal.
I cannot believe that the Council could possibly consider this. Anyone knowing the area would also know that at school dropping off time the roads simply do not have the capacity for exisiting traffic; let alone more. I live in Fulmer Way and many is the time that I have had to reverse down the length of Midhurst Road to enable oncoming traffic to travel down to access Ridley Avenue. Sometimes this requires the same action by several cars - it is a rat-run linking Northfields Avenue and Boston Road and the problem is exacerbated by the existence of the school in its already enlarged capacity. I am sure locals would have serious concerns about safety issues.
Cars are also parked thoughtlessly and inconsiderately by parents dropping off and existing signage and traffic measures have not solved this. Any notion of access from Fielding Walk would only exacerbate the problem.
Whilst I would not want local children to be prejudiced by having to travel further afield, this sort of expansion would appear to serve way beyond the exisiting local community - one could conclude that it is merely the cheapest option and it would be interesting to know on what basis 'biggest is best' could possibly apply to a Primary School!
I am sure those living even nearer would be severely prejudiced by traffic, parking problems and noise. Surely, the Council will think again!
15. Please excuse the 'all points' email but I thought it best if I at least initially registered my views with you all.
To give you some general context for this email:
I am a parent of a child in year …… at Fielding School and a local resident (….. Wyndham Road) as such therefore I have an interest in the proposed expansion of Fielding School. Although my son will be moving from the school at the end of this year and will not himself be materially affected by the proposed changes, having seen two children through the school over the last 10 years or so and been actively involved in the life of the school over that time I feel I have a good understanding of the ethos of Fielding and the likely impact of the proposed expansion.
Broadly I have some reservations about the proposals to create a 'super-size' school and I am not sure the present ethos can be maintained through this expansion. I am however heartened to hear that the new buildings proposed will not encroach on the school field (except minimally) as I feel this and its use for various sporting activities both inside and outside the school curriculum is a vital element of what makes the school different from others. I can also understand that the new teaching structures which may well ensue as a result of the expansion may enhance the school's opportunities to recruit and retain a high quality of teaching staff. In conclusion therefore - as far as the effect on the school itself goes - I think the arguments for expansion hold some water, although personally, like many parents I know, I would prefer that my child were taught in a smaller school than that proposed.
It is with the actual physical details of the proposed expansion that I have more concerns. As a local resident I am tolerant of the needs of the school and understand that these may impact upon me and my family occasionally. From a personal perspective it seems that the proposed new school buildings will not adversely effect us. The proposed single storey extension of the current reception classrooms which are directly behind our property seems reasonable - providing that the roof line of the new buildings remains no higher than its current level and the (security) lighting which is to be included in the proposed extension is no more than the current two lighting units for the existing three classrooms and is of a type (as are the current lights) which direct their light to the ground and are 'hooded' or 'shaded' to minimise light spillage into adjacent properties. I shall be keenly monitoring the plans for this building in this respect particularly should the proposed expansion proceed.
My primary concern however with the proposed expansion is the likely effect it will have on traffic in the area. Already parking in Wyndham Road where I live is difficult at most times but is particularly bad at school opening and closing times and when there are extra events such as football games or tournaments etc. To increase this school related traffic by 33% is a little alarming and at the meeting I attended at the school the representative from the council was extremely vague on this aspect of the proposal. I have since spoke with Kieran Flynn who kindly outlined the ongoing policies the council has for working with schools to encourage parents not to use their cars. While these policies are laudable they remain only as good as the voluntary take up of them by schools and parents.
Additionally I was a little alarmed in my conversation with Mr Flynn to learn that Geoff Warren, who I understand heads up traffic planning for the council 'was not aware' of the Fielding expansion proposals! I am currently awaiting a phone a call from the relevant council officer dealing with this aspect of the proposal.
It is also to be noted that the interests of the school and its stake holders are not necessarily the same as those of local residents in the matter of traffic control. Traffic calming measures - such as, for example, the previous proposal to make Wyndham Road 'one way' may benefit (in theory) children and parents in their journey to and from school, but would make some local resident's lives considerably more difficult. My impression (and fear) is that the impact of the inevitable increase in traffic that the proposed expansion of Fielding School will create has not yet been properly assessed and I would urge that this be done as soon as possible - IN CONSULTATION WITH LOCAL RESIDENTS. I am sure that it is not beyond the wit of all interested parties to come up with a solution for this problem (perhaps a free residents parking scheme to prevent parents parking at school opening and closing times in local streets?) but it is one that has to be addressed if the proposed expansion is to succeed in engaging the support of local residents.
I hope you can see from this email that I am not just a whinging 'NIMBY' and am happy to be constructive in trying to arrive at a solution to any problems that the expansion of Fielding may create. I await your response/s at your earliest convenience.
16. I am writing to voice my concerns over the proposed expansion of Fielding Primary School. Like many other parents at the school, I feel that expanding an already large primary school would not be beneficial to either the pupils or the local community. Starting primary school can be a daunting experience for a small child, and being one of an intake of 120 would not in my opinion be likely to help the settling in process. It is important that a primary school provide a nurturing environment in the early years and I do not believe that such a large intake could do this successfully.
The necessary building work would be hugely disruptive to the pupils already at the school and could have serious health and safety implications, however carefully managed. The impact on the surrounding community would also be undesirable - the roads are already busy around the school, and parking at the beginning and end of the day tricky for those who drive to school. With a larger intake, traffic would inevitably increase and the catchment of the school would certainly expand over a period of time, which would not only increase traffic, but possibly also affect the community feel of the school. Currently a high proportion of the intake lives within walking distance (even if they still travel by car!) which makes the school truly "local". If the catchment area were to expand, that would change and I feel that a primary school needs to be local.
This project feels like an already done deal, even though the consultation process has not yet closed. Many parents feel that alternative options have not been fully explored and that there are parties involved in this project who want it to go ahead in spite of reservations from many parents and local residents, of which I am both.
17. I am taking this opportunity, during the period of statutory consultation, to register my objection to the expansion of Fielding Primary School.
I would also like to add that I think the council’s consultation process has been seriously flawed and has paid lip-service to considering parents’ and residents’ opinions:
• It is unacceptable that a ‘wide-ranging’ consultation on expansion of primary schools by the council last Spring elicited 53 responses. • It is clear that the decision to expand Fielding was taken many months ago, even before parents’ and residents’ views had been heard. This was demonstrated to me by correspondence from local councillors last summer and from comments made at recent meetings at Fielding and Little Ealing schools. The council has no alternative plan bar erecting portacabins at all their chosen sites for expansion. • All the proposal documents suggest that the expansion will commence in September 2010. However it was disclosed at the school meeting on Monday 26 January that it is extremely likely that an extra form will be admitted from September 2009 and therefore the proposal is misleading. • Local residents have been excluded from the debate about Fielding Primary until very recently by a lack of direct communication. • It is disappointing that no councillors had the courtesy to attend to the meeting at Fielding Primary school on Monday 26 January and to answer questions from residents. At the very least they could have sent their apologies. Councillor Ian Gibb did attend the meeting at Little Ealing school, responding to points raised and providing some useful information.
My main objection is still that four forms of entry (4FE) are too many for a primary school, especially in this confined residential area. Since currently only a tiny proportion of primary schools in the UK have 4FE, the long term consequences of schooling for very young children on such a large scale are not yet known. At the very least, communication will become more difficult and management more complex. The current staff inevitably has no experience of managing, or even working within, a primary school of that size and therefore the council is gambling with our children’s education and well-being by proceeding in haste with the expansion.
Furthermore I believe there is a real danger that there will be a loss of community spirit as teachers, parents and pupils struggle to know one another in the way they do now. Any loss will have a major impact, not just on a practical and emotional level but also financially if the bonds created by parents and promoted by the PTFA are lost. A sense of ownership and responsibility which comes from smaller numbers will tend to diminish amongst a larger group.
In relation to the expansion itself, I am extremely concerned that: • sufficient council funding will not be forth-coming and therefore that a sub-standard solution will result • an additional form will be accepted into Reception this year, even before the appropriate infrastructure is in place and leaving very little time for staff to prepare adequately • the existing traffic and parking difficulties will be exacerbated by the inevitable increase in traffic. I believe that even if the council attempts to address these issues, they will implement a heavy-handed solution which will inconvenience residents even more than they are now.
It has been made clear that Fielding will not receive adequate capital funding without the expansion. For this reason and because there is no alternative plan, the governors of the school have felt compelled to support the council’s proposals.
With the recent falls in the property market, I believe the council should be urgently revisiting the possibility of finding a site for a new school in this area.
18. Madam/Sirs The proposed increase in size of Fielding School raises a number of issues.
1) The increase in the traffic congestion will become unbearable for the local residents, I have witnessed traffic accidents in windmill road. The increase in traffic will place the children in greater danger.
2) The disruption to children whilst the proposed building work is carried out, will be great and the effect on their education is such that it will have to be recovered later in their school life.
3) The pressure on playground and playing field space will be increased and the children will suffer.
4) I, my two brothers and four sisters all went two Fielding School, it is a local school built for the local children's education. The local infrastructure cannot cope with something it was not designed to be.
19. I am writing to express my concerns at the expansion plan for the following reasons:
1.4 Form Entry will make the school too large and damage pupil welfare
The school expansion will be to the detriment of the current pupils school experience.
The school already suffers from being very large which effects the personal and pastoral care that the children experience outside of the classroom and the opportunities to be treated as individuals in the wider school community. It is also an intimidating environment, particularly for KS1 pupils.
It is in danger of becoming extremely impersonal to the detriment of the childrens' development.
For example; children already rarely get the opportunity to perform publicly, which we are repeatedly told is valuable for their confidence. Where performances do occur, for example at Christmas or in sharing assembleys or productions they have to share roles, speak in unison, or have very small parts as it is impossible for 90 children to take part individually. It also affects sports and musical opportunities as a large number of children end up competing to be in 1 school team or group of a limited size for events such as inter school competitive games. This would be exacerbated by larger year sizes. I believe this hampers the development of their potential and means they are extremely disadvantaged compared to children in small schools.
Furthermore managing such large year groups becomes difficult as they cannot fit into communal spaces, particularly when parents are involved too and supervision is stretched when multiple events have to be scheduled. Even use of areas such as the library become limited as there is insufficient time to let all classes visit the facilities. In particular scheduling lunch times over long periods is highly problematic as many children have to eat far too early or far too late during the lunchtime period.
I personally believe that parents will decide not to opt for such a large school with the result that demand for spaces will not meet the desired number for 4 form entry.
2. Planning
I believe that if the school place requirements have increased so significantly Ealing should have planned an extra school or made The Grange larger when it was rebuilt. There is a 5 year lapse between birth and starting school which should allow the LEA to make provision in good time not suddenly start expanding schools at 6 months notice. (We have been told the increased intake will start in Sep 09).
There has been no communication showing the anticipated intake over next 10 - 15 years; we have no information on the long term requirements or whether the larger building will even be needed in 5 years time.
3. Process
The public consultation appears to have been ill-managed.
I turned up for a meeting advertised as being at 8.30pm on Tuesday 27 January in a letter from the school but the school was closed and it did not take place. I later found out it was a typing error which was rectified in a letter from the governors (on page 2 of a dense paragraph) but not highlighted by the school at all.
A second drop-in session was due to be held on a day that was severly disrupted by snow, which would have deterred attendees, but it has not been rescheduled.
It also appears from all communications that the decision has already been made and the public consultation will be of little consequence.
4. Traffic and Pupil Safety
Traffic on the roads around the school is already a safety hazard for pupils and residents alike, particulary on Midhurst and Wyndham Roads. Whatever plans are put in place this is bound to get worse especially during the building periods when lorries will be entering the site as well.
5. Disruption & Restrictions for current pupils
It is extremely unfair for current pupils to have the disruption of temporary classrooms, site restrictions, restrictions on their use of playgrounds and use of the field for classrooms which will last for a number of years during their primary school careers. Our past experience as parents informs us that this will inevitably lead to cancellation of events/ clubs/ sports activities/ concerts/ performances etc.
6.Environmental impact of larger buildings on the current site.
Two storey expansions will damage the aesthetics of the site and be intimidating for pupils.
7. Role of the governors
The governors have researched the proprosal and arrived at a decision to "fully embrace and support the proposal" without having consulted parents or held meetings formally despite the fact that the parent governors are elected by and should represent the interests of parents.
We would like to register our objections to the proposal and trust that our concerns will be noted.
20. I wish formally to register my total opposition to the proposed expansion of Fielding School to four form entry from September 2009.
I was unable to attend the open evening for parents and local residents held on 26th January because of the very short notice given. When I went along to an alternative date given, Tuesday 27th January between 8.30 - 9.30 pm, it was to discover that the time should have been 8.30 - 9.30 AM, thus the twenty or so people who had gathered were unable to express their views.
Not having been able to listen to proposals in person, nor to ask questions, I am left in the position of falling back on my own opinions and experiences.
I am a local resident of some 15 years' standing, but I am not a 'NIMBY': I was fully in favour of the expansion of Fielding from 2 form to 3 form entry. I speak from the position therefore of a formerly supportive resident, and also of a teacher of over 30 years' experience, in state schools and now a leading dyslexia charity, in primary, secondary and adult education sectors. Currently, one of my dyslexia projects is based in a Surrey primary school which is 3 form entry.
As a resident, I am concerned that the expanding size, and more importantly expanding cachment area, will mean even greater traffic congestion in our area. Far from being a local school that parents and children alike can walk to, parents are increasingly forced into the position of using their cars in order to come from the other side of the Uxbridge Road, not a journey I would want a child of mine to make on foot. The area from Boston Road to Northfields Avenue is already a 'rat run' in the rush hour periods, often of inappropriately sized vehicles, and the congestion and subsequent danger to motorists and pedestrians alike is already much greater than is desirable. It is only a matter of time already before there is a serious accident, let alone what will be the case as the school expands.
Furthermore, this area is completley unsuited to expansion as regards buildings on the site. True, the school is fortunate in having extensive grounds, but is not this exactly why it is able to play host to so many sporting events, compared with many local primary schools? However, it is bounded by Edwardian houses, in a shortly to become heritage area -quite rightly- and large, two storey buildings are completely out of keeping with the local area. Moreover, having spent 18 months in a school undergoing extensive building works, it was a far from education-friendly environment for staff and pupils alike; and the alternative might be to pay more and build only during evenings and at weekends, at which point I would unashamedly become nimby-like, valuing the time I have outside long teaching and travelling hours. I also have to say, on a more personal note, that Fielding School does not have a good track record on consultation and consideration for local residents, including parents of existing pupils, and this understandably makes me doubt any new period of 'consultation' and development.
As a parent and as a teacher, I would very seriously question the desirability of a four form entry primary school. There are very few in existence anywhere in the country; even in London I believe there to be around 10 such sized schools, and there has been far less research into size and performance in primary schools than in the secondary sector: uncharted territory. For 9 years I worked in a 4 form entry London secondary school - remarkably small by secondary standards- and even there it was not possible to know all the pupils individually. Surely in a primary school even more than a secondary that is exactly what is needed? As it is, although Fielding gains 'good' KS2 SATs scores, the 'value added' is by no means one of the highest in the borough: in the 2007 league tables 15 schools did better, and 3 equally well. If the school cannot do better than that in such a privileged cachment area as a 3 form entry school, how much more likely is it that the school will perform better during a period of unsettled expansion? The primary school I am involved with in Surrey, in a large ex- council house estate, not only does almost as well in percentage figures, it consistently outperforms in value added. Not for nothing has it been labelled one of the best 10 primaries in the country for value added. What is Fielding doing to rival that, and how much more likely is it in the future if current proposals go ahead? What characterises the school I work with is a strong and positive ethos, where individual children are known and valued, and where children with specific learning difficulties are involved in ground-breaking national initiatives which would have been celebrated in the House of Commons last Tuesday had it not been for the weather.
I supported the expansion of Fielding to 3 form entry, because I know from the inside that certain curricular matters can be served better if the school is larger: for example a school of this size is more likely to have a dedicated ICT suite, specialist music lessons, and it is far more likely - thinking of my specialism - that there is a trained SpLD specialist teacher, or at the very least several highly trained higher teaching assistants. Changing to 4 form entry does not bring a corresponding increase in curricular choice - or it shouldn't if the school is adequately funded and wise decisions have been made - but instead brings many disadvantages. As a teacher, I have never supported changes that are supposedly more 'economic': good education never comes cheap.
To sum up: as a local resident I am far from happy, as a teacher I am very doubtful, and as a parent I would be most unhappy at the notion of my primary aged child/ren being used as experimental guinea pigs in such a poorly thought through proposal. As is the case with many of my neighbours, I am thus joining the local campaign to oppose most strongly any such plans, and nothing I have seen or heard thus far has changed my mind.
21. I am extremely concerned at the proposed expansion of Fielding School from 3-form to 4-form entry. An expanded school would offer the local residents of this area the unwelcome prospects of increased playground noise, increased traffic congestion, and increased domination of our residential environment by the proposed larger buildings.
My house backs onto the Fielding green space, and my family has lived here for more than 30 years. We have already suffered big changes in our residential environment associated with past increases in numbers of children and staff at the school. We are adversely affected by the increased numbers of children and visitors who use the green space, not only during the playtimes but on many evenings and weekends - even in the school holidays. We are frequently overwhelmed by noisy crowds that occupy the entire space during football competitions (5 games at a time), funfair days, barbecues and boot sales. Our small gardens are directly adjacent, and it is increasingly difficult to spend a quiet summer’s day in the garden because of the noise of shouting, screaming, or music. As my wife and I prepare for retirement, we recognise that an already undesirable situation is on the verge of becoming intolerable.
We bought our house because of the pleasing aspect at the rear afforded by the then middle- sized school building and the green space. The building gets bigger and bigger, and its increasing presence is not nice to live next to. The school expansion would involve 5 extra classrooms on a second storey, and 6 in a single storey block – both of which will detract from the view from the house. In addition, the single storey block and part of the hard playground would encroach into the green space behind the Community Centre. During construction, the temporary classrooms would have to be moved onto the green space! Isn’t it obvious that the Council is trying to squeeze a quart into a pint pot?
It is common knowledge that traffic congestion at the junctions of Haslemere Road, Midhurst Road and Wyndham Avenue is caused by parents dropping off and meeting their children at the ends of the school day. This problem would clearly get worse, at least in proportion to the proposed extra children in the school. We are also aghast at the prospect of a school opening onto Fielding Walk, a strategy that appears calculated to spread the congestion problem by encouraging parents to use additional dropping off points in Midhurst Road and Northcroft Road. The residents of my part of Midhurst Road do not welcome more parking restrictions (we’ve had a belly-full of CPZ), or traffic constraints forced on us to meet the needs of remote parents chauffering their children to the expanded school.
It is nice to have a local school that is judged “outstanding”, but I feel that the Council risks ruining the character of the school, when the ramifications for the children cannot reliably be foreseen, and those for local residents and motorists are all negative. I would urge the Council to leave Fielding alone, and to focus effort on improving other schools in the area, or on a new-build in a location with more space and fewer drawbacks for local residents.
22.
We, as residents close to the FIelding School complex, have some concerns over the expansion of the school to almost double the number of pupils. The school only increased its intake a few years ago; just because they have room, they shouldn't just be the assumed place to expand again. There are considerable problems each morning with the number of parents who don't appear to be able to walk their children to school. They have to drive and in doing so, they cause considerable congestion in the immediate area. More children, more parents will inevitabley increase this problem. Ideas about using alternative entrances will simply shuffle the problem around from one road to another. There are already congestion problems in the local roads with speed humps trying to slow the traffic to reasonable speeds. An increase of a third would inevitably put an inordinate strain on the area.
Could I therefore register our objections to the scheme. I hope to make it to the surgery but may be busy with my own children.
23.
I write as a resident of Bernard Avenue, former treasurer of the Fielding School PTA and parent of a former pupil.
I wish to object to the proposed expansion of Fielding School on two grounds:
1. I believe strongly that primary school sizes in the Borough have already got too large. Large impersonal schools for the primary school age group may just about work for children with well-educated, highly motivated and supportive middle class parents. But they cannot provide the individual care, attention and emotional support that children from immigrant and other less privileged or supportive backgrounds need. Quality of education apart, there is already a huge social problem with the seeds of serious delinquency being sown at an ever younger age. Larger schools is exactly the wrong direction to go – a point , of course, which applies across the Borough.
I appreciate that it is simpler and quicker to expand existing schools but opening new schools, even if initially in existing buildings which are not purpose built, is a far better solution. It also avoids the problems for existing schools of trying to educate and ensure the safety of children in the middle of a construction site for a year or more.
2. Parking and traffic congestion is already an acute problem in the vicinity of Fielding School (and the failure to re-surface Wyndham Road only adds to the dangers). I would be interested to hear how the emergency services currently plan on getting access to the School or surrounding properties on a Monday morning at school arrival time, when half the surrounding streets are blocked by refuse/recycling lorries and gridlock is frequent. How they would manage after the proposed 33% expansion in the school roll I cannot begin to imagine. Have you consulted them?
I have just re-trained for a new line of work where I will be based at home and have heavy and valuable equipment which I need to take with me on assignments but cannot leave in the car, i.e. I need to be able to park near my front door and to be able to drive to/from my house without undue hindrance at any time between 7am and 7pm.
It is not just an issue of road capacity, it is also a question of pavement capacity, as it is in the nature of a primary school that many parents who walk their children to school are pushing buggies and/or escorting a child who is on a bicycle. Have you done a health and safety assessment of the proposal?
In short, for educational, social, traffic and safety reasons, I believe it would be a grave mistake to expand Fielding School and I urge the Council to re-consider and look instead at opening new schools.
24. I would like to express my opinion about the planned expansion of Fielding Primary School as I feel that this is compromising the future of the school and its pupils basically for the following reasons:
Primary school is where children are initiated into school life and as such need to be in an environment where they feel that they are still special and receive all the pastoral care they need to enable them to feel confident at school, with so many pupils this will be impossible, it makes the primary school into the size of a secondary school which is even daunting for some 11 year olds let alone a 5 year old starting school.
Secondly, one of the main attractions of Fielding is the large sports field which allows the children to participate in lots of sports as they have the space to be able to do so. Fielding have also made the most of this with the children doing lots of PE per week. Using the field to build extra buildings to expand the school would destroy this and be to the detriment of the children. Even at its present size the field is busy on sports days. All of this seems to go against what the government is trying to achieve with getting young people into sport and to cut down on obiesity.
Thirdly, the safety of the children will be compromised. At present, although a large school many of the parents and carers know each other so if they see a child with someone who they don’t know then it would be easy to notice whereas with another form per year this safety net would disappear.
Fourthly, it is an easy option for the council rather than building another school. I do not believe that other options have been explored sufficiently nor the question of primary education and what children need at this stage of their education being taken into consideration. Residents of the borough are therefore being short changed as the school fails in the future due to patching over a problem and trying to save money rather than spending more initially and making the best decision for ALL concerned. Additionally, on this point I would like to express how disappointed I have been in the council and the school’s attitude towards the expansion as there has been no consideration of the comments from residents of the borough and it has basically been proposed as a done deal – very similar to the tram fiasco of the previous council.
Finally, whilst it is said that there has been an increase in applications to the school due to the growing population in the area, there are still children who come to the school whilst outside of the catchment area, this is therefore NOT a reason to expand the school. Even if there are more applications from children within catchment, the council should be looking at other solutions rather than expansion for the reasons given above. The council needs to think creatively about different solutions and keep foremost in its mind the kind of education that it provides for the children in its care.
I hope that the council will realise the full damage of this proposal before it is too late and the education of hundreds of children in the borough is compromised.
25. I beleive that the school expansion proposals are a foregone conclusion so my concerns are that the school doesn't become so large and impersonal that children are 'forgotten' and lost in the system and become just a number not individuals.
I think this can happen even in a 3- form entry school so I would hope that Fielding uses the opportunity to split the school into two forms per year for school plays, sports days etc rather than the three forms all together as is presently the case.
Whislt I think Fielding organises well with the large numbers it has to deal with, there is a limited role that 90 children can play in these arena's and therefore such a structure could bring better opportunity in the development, nurturing and confidence of the children, rather than now having 120 children all lumped together.
26. I oppose the expansion of Fielding. As it is the school is already creaking at the seams with current numbers. Impersonal 'super' schools at primary level are not the answer. Children during their formative years need nurturing as young individuals in smaller friendlier environments. There's plenty of evidence to support this. In formulating a solution to the problem, Ealing Council should be considering the needs of the child first. After all, they are the intended consumer of what's being provided and also our future - call it succession planning! I urge the Council to look at this again before making a decision that could have catastrophic consequences for the future of the community's children - a future we all share a collective responsibility for.
27. I would like to register my on-going concern about the expansion of Fielding Primary School from 3 forms of entry to 4.
While I wholeheartedly agree that children should be able to go to their local school, I still have concerns that the council has not adequately followed consultation rules or addressed parents and residents concerns.
I also feel the consultation has not been done properly. For example, - We only received notice of the stakeholder meeting on Thurs 22nd January, with the meeting happening on Monday night. Bearly enough time to reorganise other commitments or find a babysitter. - The time for the first drop in session was incorrectly advertised. - The second drop in session did not happen thanks to the snow. - The same stakeholder meeting took place for both the residents and the parents when the issues from each are quite different.
My main reasons for concern about the expansion of the school are:
The impact the size of the school will have on nurturing young children. To move to four forms per year would probably lead to a loss of a community feel in the school, which is already difficult to maintain. It has been shown in many studies that large schools can have a detrimental effect on young children. Up until now our children have been happy at the school and we have been very supportive in how they are being educated.
The effect on the results of the school which up to now have been excellent. Can this really be maintained in a disrupted, larger school?
The loss of valuable green space and playgrounds which is a key feature of the school. This fabulous resource so rare in the London area and it would be a tragedy to reduce this facility. Within the plans there are plans to concrete over the Northfields community Centre end of the field.
Disruption to local residents from construction vehicles and restricted access to the school, particularly if the Coombe road entrance is out-of-action. The residential area is not suited to an increase in traffic flow likely from a growth in edge of catchment and out of catchment children – there are already frequent fights among drivers in the Midhurst Road area. There would also be parking problems in the area as more teachers and parents try to park in the streets surrounding the school. Also, the closure of the Coombe Road entrance during the snowy week showed that the Wyndam Road entrance cannot cope with that many people coming and going.
Disruption to the education of the pupils while the building work is taking place. Building by its very nature is loud, dusty and messy and I cannot believe that this will not effect children in their classes.
Currently the school is taking people from out of catchment area – is this really not the case going forward? As parents we know that each year, including reception, has pupils from out of catchment so it makes it hard to believe that this suddently will not be the case if the school expands.
• Parents are being bribed to accept the proposals by saying that this is the only way the school will only get the improvements in needs.
Before this proposal goes ahead it would be good for parents and residents to: • Understand what alternatives have been considered and understand that this wasn’t just the ‘easy’ solution. For example, is it possible to build near Elthorne Park School? • Understand how you are going to deal with the disruption in the local area. • Hear how you will prevent disruption to the children and keep a community feel within the school. • Feel that the consultation process had been done properly, rather than just being presented as a ‘done deal’. I hope my views are taken into account and that I will get a response from you.
28. I have been advised that you are the correct person within the Council to address my strong objection to the expansion of Fielding Primary School.
My children both attended Fielding Primary School and so we are very aware of it's popularity and the congestion already resulting in an increase in the intake about 7years ago. The roads surrounding the school are narrow and heavily congested at key times of the day, which is a nightmare for drivers, local residents but especially to the children walking to school. Increasing the school intake would presumably increase the catchment area thereby also increasing the car usage on the school run. This area needs less cars at these critical times, not more,or children's safety will be severely compromised.
The Council do not appear to have individually consulted the residents of the very many small road surrounding Fielding School to fully advise them of its its intentions and the resulting increase in noise, disruption, parking issues, dirt and the devaluation of their properties if such a huge school,is developed in their backyard.
There is no major road to access the school so it will inevitably require work lorries to be travelling down the smaller local roads causing chaos, noise, disruption and danger
If the School is then increased the parking problems will multiply with not just the school run issues but those of normal, daily school functions and events which will cause chaos to a very delicate parking balance currently established within and outside controlled zone areas.
The plans for adding a second storey to one of the building will intrude severely on the neighbours surrounding the school.
Surely it would be better to find a new site to build a new school rather than putting such additional strain on an existing school. and it's surrounding neighbourhood and infrastructure?
29. In the expectation that you are receiving a torrent of emails & letters adamantly opposed to the expansion of Fielding school, we thought it important to put on record our views, as Fielding parents, in support of the expansion from this September, both as a result of our personal circumstances & our wider concerns about primary education in the Borough.
Our circumstances
We are just out of catchment for Fielding & just in catchment for Oaklands. We bought our house here well before we were married let alone considering having children or choosing schools. Nonetheless, when our son was approaching school age, having researched & visited both schools, we decided that Fielding was our preference & applied accordingly. We were offered a place at Oaklands, not Fielding, & accepted, but asked to be placed on the waiting list for Fielding in the hope of getting a place for our son as soon as possible. We remained on the waiting list for 2 years. In the meantime, the excellent Head at Oaklands, as we had predicted, left the school. He was replaced by someone who, it turned out, was apparently not even qualified to be a Head. It took over a year to dismiss her, so our son attended a school without a Head for the whole of the following year, with all the attendant difficulties & frustrations. This Autumn, we were finally offered, & accepted, a place for our son at Fielding & moved him during the Autumn term.
We have another younger …., who will start in Reception this September. Given the oversubscription of Fielding even within catchment this year, it is clear not only that we shall not be granted a place for him at Fielding if there are 3 forms of entry as currently, but that, in all probability, we shall never be offered a place for him despite having a sibling priority: this year there will be catchment children who are not offered places unless an expansion takes place. Furthermore, economic circumstances exacerbate the problem as very few people are moving house at present & no doubt fewer parents will opt to send their children to independent schools, having applied to Fielding as their catchment school.
Whilst it might be possible to manage two different school drop-offs & pick-ups at almost identical times by relying on the goodwill of friends & neighbours for a short period, I'm sure you will agree that this is not feasible longer-term, even if it were desirable. We feel that in these circumstances, we should be forced to renounce our place at Fielding, for which we waited two years, & to move our older son back to Oaklands, should a place in his year-group remain available, purely for logistical reasons. You can imagine how galling, & we feel, unfair this would be, given the circumstances described above.
Primary education in the Borough
We have been watching with alarm the apparent increasing over-subscription of all local schools in this area over the last several years. Having seen the recent trend statistics & projections for live births & Reception age children in the Borough we now appreciate why this has occurred. The Council has a statutory duty to provide places for its schoolchildren. For children reaching Reception age this year & living on the edges of the Fielding catchment, places are apparently only likely to be available in schools which are a considerable distance from their homes, because they cannot attend their catchment school but are de facto out of catchment for the other local schools which are all oversubscribed. This is of course highly undesirable & inconvenient for them, their families & the schools they will attend, & will necessarily lead to an increase in car drop-offs & pick-ups at those schools.
It seems inevitable that expansion of schools in this area should take place, despite the evident concerns of existing pupils' parents, given the immediacy of the demand & the unavailability either of finance or of an appropriate site for a new school. Fielding provides a far more suitable site for expansion than other older schools. Moreover people want to send their children to Fielding - it is an obvious choice if local schools are to be expanded.
And if Fielding is to be expanded, it should take place from this September. As we understand it from school statistics there is already around a whole extra form of entry of catchment or sibling applications who cannot currently be offered places: expanding the school from September 2010 will not solve these families' problems.
People do not like change, & our children's education is an emotive subject. Like other Fielding parents, we are nervous about the disruption the building process will cause, though we do not particularly share concerns about the manageability of such a large institution. In our view, Fielding is already a very large primary school & it copes perfectly well.
The Council must proceed with a sustainable plan for primary education. Forcing families to send their children to schools which are inappropriate, either because they are distant from their homes, or because parents are required to be in two places at once, cannot surely be the right course of action, especially where the numbers faced with such dilemmas is only going to increase.
In recent years there has been much discussion about the provision of choice in public services. As far as we are concerned, there is no question currently in this part of Ealing of any choice in primary education. On the contrary, our choice was not only denied us in the first place, but may now be denied a second & third time for both our sons, despite our clear commitment to the decision we made originally. Unless, that is, the expansion of Fielding takes place from this September.
30. My husband and I would like to register our opposition to the proposal to expand Fielding Primary School for the following reasons: 1.The school is already one of the largest primaries in the country and adding more classes will only create more traffic congestion in what is already a badly congested residential area. Increasing the numbers will mean that pupils will come from even further afield and are therefore more likely to arrive by car. The roads around the school are narrow and parked up and already suffer from traffic problems. Lack of parking encourages parents to park unlawfully on school zig-zags which is dangerous for residents and pupils alike. 2. This congestion as well as increased noise from the school itself will cause considerable nuisance to neighbours who are already suffering from this in what is a tightly packed residential area. 3. As parents whose two sons both attended the school which had already been extended,we feel that any further extension will adversely affect the education of young children going there. This primary school will be larger than many high schools and we do not believe that it is suitable for young children to be educated in such a crowded environment. When my children were there it was impossible for whole year assemblies and meetings to take place because the Hall was not large enough and there was also considerable crowding at lunch times. Adding extra classes is only going to make the situation worse. 4. Finally, the building works will cause considerable disruption to neighbours and it would be very distracting for the pupils at the school if the construction of new classrooms on top of others takes place during term time while the children are on site.
Our clear preference would be for the existing school not to be expanded any further and the extra places be provided at a smaller school elsewhere in south Ealing.
31. As parents of a child at the school, and as local residents, we have the following concerns regarding the expansion of Fielding school - disruption for the children during the building works; the school is already very large - a 33% increase will take away its character and community feel; traffic congestion and thoughtless driving posing an increased danger to pedestrians; speeding on Haslemere Avenue is already a problem - extra traffic will increase the danger of speeding and impatient drivers; Haslemere Avenue is already a rat run - there should be a 20 mph zone and traffic calming measures as it is - further expansion of the school reinforces the need for this; there has been no satisfactory explanation of why a new school could be built or extra places spread around more schools eg Grange is undersubscribed;
32. I write to express my concerns re the expansion of Fielding Primary School and OBJECT to any such increase in the size of the school.
In addition to increasing the volume of traffic, there is the very important issue of the impact on the community that an increased school size would have. I doubt if this has even been considered. You cannot keep adding classrooms to the existing schools without considering the overall communities long term needs.
To spend money now would totally wasted as I foresee in a couple of years the same situation arising with even greater provision being required. And this could continue every few years or so.
A better solution would be to place temporary classrooms/portacabins in the existing schools whilst a totally new primary school is built (with the Council compulsorily purchasing land or buildings). In other words a new school planned precisely to the needs of the overall community and its needs covering the next 20/30 years or so. Demand will only increase and to spend money now with a permanent structure would be a waste of time. Temporary classrooms these days are excellent and can be in place very quickly and are low in cost and maintenance.
Therefore the overall needs of the community should be carefully considered now instead of this school and others just adding classrooms after classrooms. We need an Ealing grand plan that addresses the overall needs of the community.
Pity this was not thought of four years ago when the Council knew of the baby boom and a new school could already be in place - it could have purchased the old Mount Carmel School - Need I Say More!
NO TO EXPANSION.
33. with reference to the proposed expansion of Fielding Primary School. As a parent of 2 children currently at the school I object to this proposal on the following grounds.
1. The council has shown little in the way of exploring alternatives. In particular the viability of building a new school elsewhere does not seem to have investigated fully. This is probably the product of poor long term planning on the councils behalf. As usual their response is take what they consider the easiest route in the short term. What happens in 5 years time when this stop gap measure fails to keep up with the numbers required. Does Fielding go on expanding indefinitely (which is clearly impossible) or should the council come to terms with the fact the area needs more schools and build them as a matter of urgency. Perhaps this would involve the knock on effect of increasing the council tax in this area. Dare I say that this would be a politically unpopular move. I wouldn't like to think that political expediency might be the real reason behind this proposal. These are our children after all.
2. No study or account of the impact on our children's education seems to have taken place. Why not?
3. The proposal has been presented to the parents as something over which we have little control or say in. The usual rail-roading local authority "done deal" gambit has been employed throughout. Surely this cannot be ethical.
34. I am objecting to the proposed expansion of Fieldin Primary School. 1) The playgrounds are only just big enough for the present amount of pupils. 2) The disruption to the school life during the building works. 3) Traffic and parking in the area is already chaotic at pick up and drop off. The neighbours complain as it is about noise from the school. 4) There is only just enough room to hold year assemblies.if there were 120 in a year how would everyone fit into the two smallish halls?? 5) School clubs-as it stands with 90 in a year kids usually only get a taster of a club as it is. The sewing club lasted 4 weeks and then it was the next lot ' s turn. 120 kids a year-would there be any clubs that would last longer than 4 weeks?? 6) The school is at its optimum size for the area. At the end of a summer term I asked to pick up a child and none of the teachers from that year knew that I was in the wrong year group. This shows that it is difficult to get to know all the kids from 1 year at 90 ipuplis ntake let alone 120! 7)There has been some short sightedness on the part of Ealing Council. These chldren have not appeared from nowhere.. A new school should be built -there are plenty of allotments in Ealing -why not use the land. What is more important-vegetables or children's education? 8)I do feel that this expansion is somewhat of a "done deal" especially with the governors agreeing to it but it was felt that they haven t listened fully to the parents objections. 9)Crowding hundreds of children into a small space does not make for a cohesive school, upsets the neighbourhood and restricts activities. Imagine sports day!!
35. I'd like to object to the expansion of fielding primary school as this will mean a school that is too big to be a safe and nice enviromnent for both children and staff.
36. Thank you for your reply and thank you for taking the time to explain this is on the telephone. Clearly an objection by me to the opening of an entrance in Fielding Walk ("FW") would be made. In order to raise an objection I clearly need to understand on what basis the school has proposed an entrance be made in FW.
Does it think that the two existing entrances could not cope with an increased number of pupils?
If the entrance to FW is at the Northcroft Road end of FW children would be alighting from vehicles on Northcroft Road and walking into FW. However, there is already an entrance to the school in Northcroft Road so if the school is thinking that it will spread the traffic problem by opening another entrance it would in fact concentrate it on Northcroft Road.
How many more pupils will there eventually being attending the school? If small in number there seems no reason why they cannot be spread amongst the existing entrances.
Will the proposed buildings that will be located close to an entrance that could be made in FW accommodate a majority of the school's pupils? If so, a greater number of children will use that entrance for shortness of journey reasons.
Would you mind informing me how an objection can be formally raised and going forward how I can receive further information linked to the expansion.
I hope you do not mind but I would appreciate a response in writing.
36.a I reside at ….. Northcroft Road and made contact with Fielding School this morning and have now been advised to write to both yourself and Cate Maybury at Ealing Council with regard to expansion plans for Fielding School - (I understand Cate can inform me of the process to submit an objection which I understand needs to be submitted by 13th February 2009). Below are communications between myself and Ealing Council for your consideration.
I was informed by the School today that all public consultation meetings have now taken place. I was also informed that a letter was delivered to all local residents. I was told by the School today that these were delivered by the headmistress and the children of the school. I have not received any such letter and I would question the reliability, professionalism and responsibility of leaving such an important task to primary school pupils especially when the impact of the expansion plans could have a negative effect on the value of my and others' property and my and their day-to-day life.
My property is adjacent to, and its access door faces on to, the short road that leads into Fielding Walk. The opening of Fielding Walk and the provision of a third entrance to the School in Fielding Walk would have an enormous detrimental impact on the value of my property and on the quality of my day to day life as I would be open to experiencing a higher volume of people traffic/noise traffic/vehicle traffic as the children would walk past my 'front' door to access the proposed third entrance to the School. A photograph of my property is attached. Please also note I worked in conjunction with the council to make bollard the area in front of my house and make the road area good that leads into Fielding Walk (please also note this road is currently unadopted).
I would very much like you to reply within 48 hours including detail of the proposals and reasoning for the request by the School to install an entrance into Fielding Walk. I would also like to be informed of how I will receive further information on the plans and proposals relating to this scheme as to date I have received no information and have only heard of these plans via word of mouth.
37.
I am a resident of Northcroft Road and have two children at Fielding School.
Our house is next door but one to Fielding Walk where it is proposed a new entrance to the school will be made.
I do not, in principle, have an objection to making the school larger. However, I would like to know what traffic calming measures will be put in place along Northcroft Road. At the moment there are none. Considering there is an entrance to the school at Coombe Road which runs off Northcroft Road, I don't understand why nothing has been done to slow the traffic.
If there is to be another entrance I think it is imperative that either Northcroft Road is blocked so it cannot be used as a rat run or extreme traffic calming measures put in to combat the increased number of cars that will be generated by enlarging the school.
One point that may be of interest to you is that the road that leads to Fielding Walk is an unadopted road which myself and two neighbours paid to have tarmaced and bollarded to stop drug dealing and dumping of cars.
I would like to know what measures will be taken to keep this road in good order taking into account the considerable increase in people using it.
38.
I completely understand the Council's need to ensure it has enough Reception places for the children in the various catchment areas across the borough. Whilst considering the expansion of Fielding School, my main areas of concern are:
1) Drop-off and pick-up time flow through of traffic - not just cars, but pedestrians. I already feel like a salmon swimming upstream when trying to get to the nursery for 9.00am when all the Reception mums/pushchairs/scooters are heading in the opposite direction having dropped off their children at 8.55am. There are already a lot of people on site at the start and end of the school day. We need to ease the flow of bodies trying to get to their playground/classroom door with more entrances, widened foot paths, staggered starts or one- way systems!
2) Please, please can the majority of the messy, noisy building work take place ONLY during the school holidays? It will make all the difference in the world to the morale of the children, staff and parents if they aren't faced with the inevitable mess and noise of a building site everyday.
Good luck with the process and we wholeheartedly wish Fielding School and Ealing Council continued success.
39. My husband and I are residents of Ridley Avenue, our property backing onto Fielding Walk. We DO NOT object to the expansion of the school and appreciate the need for more school places within the borough.
We do however require Ealing Council to address the issue of traffic and parking congestion in the area.
To put this into context. Ridley Avenue itself is already a congested road, St Paul's Church creating a lot of visiting traffic and indeed the impact on Ridley Avenue of the expansion of St Paul's Church Hall has not yet been realised. We are also concerned that the Green Traffic Plan imposed by the planning commitee has yet to be seen, even though building work to the church hall is nearing completion.
Ridley Avenue is already part of the 'rat run' between Boston Manor Road via Haslemere Road, Midhurst Road, Ridley Avenue, across Northcroft Road into Cranmer Avenue and down to Northfield Avenue.
Therefore, we require Ealing Council to impose real restrictions on the amount of traffic and parking in the Northfields area as a whole. This is not an easy task, granted, but the time has come to seriously deal with traffic congestion, the school run and the stifling effect it has on the area.
Signs in Northcroft Road indicate there has already been a problem with illegal parking around Fielding School.
Ealing residents are delighted with the improvements being made to this area, the creation of the Heritage Quarter, which Northfields is a part of. It would be regrettable if those improvements were undermined by traffic, it would be a terrible waste.
We find that at this moment of potential expansion of Fielding school, there is a timely opportunity for Ealing Council to address the issue of traffic congestion in Northfields. An Ealing council parking officer said to me over the phone, "...Northfields, yeah, you've got quite a few problems down there." Now is the time to confine such a statement to the past.
40. We live in Ridley Avenue and look over the play area of Fielding School. We are concerend about the proposed enlargement of the school because it would result in:
- increased volume of nose - increased volume of traffic - deleteriously affect the health and safety of local residents, children and parents.
Therefore, we oppose the proposed school enlargement.
41. Further to my wife's email to you and the Council yesterday, I would like to echo her sentiments and put on record my views as regards the proposed expansion of Fielding School.
In case these were not recorded, I reiterate her and my concerns below...
While I wholeheartedly agree that children should be able to go to their local school, I still have concerns that the council has not adequately followed consultation rules or addressed parents and residents concerns.
I also feel the consultation has not been done properly. For example,
- We only received notice of the stakeholder meeting on Thurs 22nd January, with the meeting happening on Monday night. Bearly enough time to reorganise other commitments or find a babysitter.
- The time for the first drop in session was incorrectly advertised.
- The second drop in session did not happen thanks to the snow.
- The same stakeholder meeting took place for both the residents and the parents when the issues from each are quite different.
*My main reasons for concern about the expansion of the school are:*
· The impact the *size of the school* will have on nurturing young children. To move to four forms per year would probably lead to a loss of a community feel in the school, which is already difficult to maintain. It has been shown in many studies that large schools can have a detrimental effect on young children. Up until now our children have been happy at the school and we have been very supportive in how they are being educated.
· The effect on the *results of the school* which up to now have been excellent. Can this really be maintained in a disrupted, larger school?
· The loss of *valuable green space* and playgrounds which is a key feature of the school. This fabulous resource so rare in the London area and it would be a tragedy to reduce this facility. Within the plans there are plans to concrete over the Northfields community Centre end of the field.
· *Disruption to local residents* from construction vehicles and restricted access to the school, particularly if the Coombe road entrance is out-of-action. The residential area is not suited to an increase in traffic flow likely from a growth in edge of catchment and out of catchment children - there are already frequent fights among drivers in the Midhurst Road area. There would also be parking problems in the area as more teachers and parents try to park in the streets surrounding the school. Also, the closure of the Coombe Road entrance during the snowy week showed that the Wyndam Road entrance cannot cope with that many people coming and going.
· *Disruption to the education of the pupils *while the building work is taking place. Building by its very nature is loud, dusty and messy and I cannot believe that this will not effect children in their classes.
· Currently the school is taking people from *out of catchment* area - is this really not the case going forward? As parents we know that each year, including reception, has pupils from out of catchment so it makes it hard to believe that this suddently will not be the case if the school expands.
- Parents are being bribed to accept the proposals by saying that this is the only way the school will only get the improvements in needs.
Before this proposal goes ahead it would be good for parents and residents to:
- Understand what alternatives have been considered and understand that this wasn't just the 'easy' solution. For example, is it possible to build near Elthorne Park School? - Understand how you are going to deal with the disruption in the local area. - Hear how you will prevent disruption to the children and keep a community feel within the school. - Feel that the consultation process had been done properly, rather than just being presented as a 'done deal'.
I hope my views are taken into account and that I will get a response from you.
42. We are concerned about the expansion of Fielding Primary School which I believe could be detrimental to the neighbourhood. I question the notion that the birthrate in the immediate area has increased significantly and fear that the catchment area of the school may be extended to take in areas some distance away where birth rates have risen sharply. My worry is that many of these children will not be within easy walking distance and that parents will feel obliged to take them to school by car thus causing congestion and safety issues in the area surrounding Fielding. I also feel that it is not beneficial for primary age children to travel long distances to school and that it adversely affects both their education and social life. Because of these factors I do not support the expansion of the school and hope the consultation process will take these concerns into consideration. Thank you
43.
I am parent of two children who currently attend Fielding Primary School. I object to the proposed expansion of the school. For two main reasons:
1. The increased building floor plan will encroach on precious outdoor play areas. 2. The school has already expanded in its recent history to become 3 FE and is currently one of the borough's largest schools. The number of children on site is daunting for a primary school especially as the Foundation stage, KS1 and KS2 children are all on the same site. Academically children are lost; there are too many children in each year group to focus attention on individual learning. Physically the school facilities are already stretched. Trying to accommodate a further 210 children seems unimaginable. Consideration needs to be given to the safety of the children on site, for example lunchtime arrangements are already noisy, overcrowded and rushed. The increased numbers of children entering and leaving the site daily could not be safely accommodated through the existing gateways and paths.
From earlier proposals by Cate Maybury, Fielding did not seem to be considered for expansion. Only those sites that were thought to have available space. So I would like to understand why Fielding is now a thought suitable?
Also why the building of a new primary school is not the priority as this was seen as the preferred solution from the initial consultation process?
I understand the headmistress and governors support the expansion as it will bring much needed investment to the school as parts of it are in desperate need of repair. Such as the current Yr 2 classroom my son is in which, because it is only a wooden hut has mould covering the walls. I agree the school does need funding for improving the facilities but that should not be dependent on expansion.
Fielding achieved an outstanding Ofsted inspection and deserves funding for building repair / maintenance / improvement without prostituting itself through expansion.
44. I am writing to object to the proposed expansion of Fielding Primary School from a three to a four form entry school. As a parentwith two children at the school I am concernedabout the welfare of all the pupils, both during the planned expansion, and afterwards when an already large school would becomes a massive school.I am worried that no research has beenpresentedtothe parents showing that such large pupil numberswill have no adverseeffects on theeducation of the children.I worry that our children will be "guinea pigs", how many other four form entry primary schools are there in the borough? I attended the public meeting at the school and was disappointed that both the headmistress and the chair of governors could only speculate on how this expansion would benefit the children, no research was presented. At the meeting it was also disappointing to realise that the only way the school could receive the funding it requires to make much needed structural improvements was to agree to become a four form entry school. Surely the replacement of 20 year old mobile classrooms is a more vital improvement for the community than replacing the neighbourhoods lampposts? Mr Redhead spoke of having 50 million pounds to spend on expanding existing schools. Isn't this enough money to build a new school and not place such an unprecedented pupil burden on existing schools? Such a high number of pupils at one school will also place a burden on the local residents. The increased footfall and traffic will be unreasonable in an Edwardian residential area that was not designed to have such a massive institution in its midst. Twice a day the school would have around 1600 people (each child is accompanied by an adult and often a buggy) arriving and departing at the same time. With pupil numbers as they are now it is chaotic and often dangerous. I believe it would be foolhardy to increase this number further and only a matter of time before a serious accident occurs. Another matter that concerns me is that neither of my children's current classes are full (one has 26 pupils and the other 28). In my eldest son's class at least 50% of the pupils live outside of the catchment area. I realise there may be demand for places in reception but this demand does not seem to continue in to the higher years when children out of catchment are given places. And it does not seem fair that the siblings of out of catchment pupils, who join the school after reception, have a right to a place in reception before catchment 4/5 year olds. Doesn't the school's admission policy need addressing rather than the school's size increasing? Unfortunately at the meeting Mrs Reeves could not give us the number of out of catchment siblings who would be given places in September 2009. I believe the council should build a new school in the borough and I object to its proposals to increase Fielding Primary School.
45. We have been advised that we can send you our comments regarding the proposed Fielding Primary School expansion to increase the Published Admission number from 90 to 120 pupils. We've sent it to 2 different email addresses, because we have been given both of these. Hopefully one of these proves to be correct.
We are opposed to the expansion for the following reasons:
1. There will be a great deal of disruption to surrounding residential area during building works:
* Noise during the building phases * Increase in traffic on already busy residential roads, especially lorries. This will lead to increased congestion; increased danger to the children, particularly at the beginning and end of school; increased air pollution; inconvenience and delay for local residents.
2. Once the school has been increased in size, there will be increased traffic during pupil school drop off and pick up. This is because, by enlarging the school there will a higher proportion of pupils coming from a further distance from the school, resulting in more children being brought by car (i.e. a higher percentage of the additional intake are likely to be brought by car since they will live further away). This will further compound the existing traffic problems and danger to pupils at the beginning and end of the school day. 3. There will be major disruption to the pupils and staff during the school enlargement building works. This may affect the achievement levels of the existing pupils. This will is particularly impact those children currently in KS1, because the proposed work is phased and will follow them through the school. 4. Is there any provision within the plans to increase the size of the halls? KS1 hall is already too small for the KS1 assemblies when parents are invited (e.g. Christmas assemblies), so these have to be taken in the KS2 hall. Will the KS2 hall be big enough for 120 pupils with parents for these types of assemblies? 5. There are already difficulties managing the lunch for the children in the existing dining area within the lunchtime period. The dining area appears to be too small to accommodate the children now, and will be with increased numbers of children. Is there any provision within the plans to increase the dining capacity for lunchtime, and will this be adequate given that it is barely adequate now? Currently, children are told that they have a short time limit to finish their food before the next children arrive. 6. Additional classrooms will mean reduced playground area for the KS1 children. 7. There will be increased pressure on the staff and organisation of the school due to the enlarged size. The school is already large, with a capacity of 630 pupils plus 100 nursery children. What provision is there to cope with the increased management overhead? 8. Do the plans include increased facilities for the additional classrooms, e.g. additional computers, interactive whiteboards (existing interactive whiteboards provided by the PTA), etc? If not, where is the money going to come from? We understand that there is no provision for any furniture or equipment for the additional classrooms. It seems unreasonable to expect the PTA (resourced by the current parents) to pay for additional equipment for the new classrooms. 9. Why are only certain schools included in the consultation? The Grange had just had significant building works completed. Could these not have incorporated an extension of the school? 10. We understand that there will need to be temporary classroom accommodation during the building work. The experience of the last expansion of Fielding School is that the temporary classrooms remain for the longer term. Can there be any guarantee that all of Phase 2 will actually go ahead, rather than going down the cheaper route of keeping the temporary classrooms for an extended period? This may be a particularly attractive option if Phase 1 goes over budget.
We hope that you can take these views into account as part of the consultation period.
46. We are writing regarding the proposed expansion of Fielding Primary School to four forms of entry. We have concerns about it, both as parents of children who are due to start at Fielding in September this year, and as residents who live close to the school.
Fielding is already a large primary school, larger than any of the surrounding schools (Little Ealing, Oaklands, and Mount Carmel). Starting school can be daunting experience for young children. If Fielding expands, reception-age children will be going into a year where they are one of 120 children.
We are concerned about whether the school will be able to maintain its existing high standards for all children if it expands and would like reassurance in terms of concrete proposals that this is achievable.
We are also concerned about the speed with which this proposal appears to be being rushed through. If the local authority has been monitoring the birth rate in the area in recent years, why has it not consulted before about these proposals?
We would like to know what research has been done into building a new 3FE school locally and whether every option to do so has been exhausted. We understand from a recent consultative meeting, at which a local authority officer was present, that the local authority has been monitoring the birth rate in the area over recent years. The demand for additional school places should therefore have been apparent for some time.
We are also concerned about the speed with which this proposal appears to be being rushed through. If the local authority has been monitoring the birth rate in the area in recent years, why has it not consulted before about these proposals?
We have further concerns, both as parents and residents, about the increase in traffic in the area the expansion will inevitably bring. Wyndham, Northcroft, and Midhurst Roads are already badly congested at school start and finish times. This is dangerous for children using the school. In addition, residents in these roads already find it impossible to park at these times. So far, we have seen no proposals to address this problem ie marked road crossings, traffic calming measures, 'lollipop man/ woman', parking restrictions etc.
We would appreciate a response on the points raised above.
47. I lived opposite Fielding and both my Children went there and then onto Elthorne (which we campaigned to get open - a new school for the area)
Whilst my children were at fielding it was expanded - all the info about how it would be better was fed to us. All I noticed was that it became more impersonal, the teachers don't know all the children and individual needs were definitely not a priority. Then they go to High School which is so big and unmanageable it is a warzone and you wonder why we have a society where no one has manners or cares about each other?
Yes you can show examples of big schools being successful - by your criteria, yes the Head Teacher wants to expand her Kingdom, but is it really the best option for the Children? Small Personal controllable schools where teachers can have the time to breath and think and care about their students has got to be the way forward. I know it's very sad when local children are not getting places in the school they would like, but are they all local, walking distance children? I don't think so. Perhaps if we dealt with those cheating the system and jumping the queues, those who really have grown up in the community and watched their older brothers and sisters and cousins go to the school would get a chance.
Tough job, but somebody has got to take a stand and realise that the current, cram them all in, " is it cost effective" attitude to our future is not best in the long run?
Are you going to take the easy option? Start really thinking outside the box.
Education, Education, Education?
On re reading my email I notice I wrote “ I lived” rather than, “ I live” opposite Fielding on Northcroft. I am still very much here and aware what is going on, with 2 nephews and a neice still there. Thought I should mention that I still have a valid interest!
48. I would like to register with you, my opposition to the expansion of Fielding Primary School for the following reasons: as a school teacher myself for 29 years I know that bigger schools are not more effective, safer or happier schools, particularly in the primary sector where students are known to benefit socially, emotionally and academically from a smaller environment. Anecdotally, I have heard first hand from Fielding parents, friends who have had older children there before 3 form entry and post that change, and staff I know still - their views are not positive, deterioration in behaviour is mentioned plus a sense of loss of a community. both my children attended Fielding school, I live in Wyndham Road and therefore have direct experience of that school and of living in this area since October 1992. It is undoubtedly a very good school and has been throughout my experience as a parent of 2 children who attended it:- from 1993-2003. When my 2nd child was in KS3 the building had been extended and 3 forms were coming through. I was very glad my 2 children managed through in 2 forms and so were they. They were very happy and secure there, everyone knew each other and teaching and learning was child centered with a firm, not harsh, regime. Standards were high and SATs were not the dominant factor of their academic life, then... My view is that 3 form entry is capacity for any primary school to maintain a balance socially, behaviourally [in the most positive sense] and academically. As a resident, it has become very difficult to park in my road [Wyndham]. Teachers/school staff are lining up in the mornings to get my space as I leave for work as car parking in school is very limited. At evening mtgs it is impossible to park in my road until after late. With 4 form entry how is the infrastructure locally going to cope? What about the people who live there? Many families still drive their children to Fielding school and many still drop off on the zig zag lines [I live behind them]. Two cars cannot poass at the same time and there is rarely a space to move into these days. Consequently cars regularly reverse down most of the road. This is not safe. Traffic generally has increased and Wyndham Road is a cut through between Boston Manor and Northfields Ave. Cars still drive at speed despite the bumps. Northcroft Road is similarly well used and very congested at school pick up and drop off times. I am totally opposed to an exit in Fielding Walk for environmental reasons and also because it is a beautiful patch of green and peace amongst the busyness and congestion around us - trees, plants at different seasons, space for young children to learn to ride bikes and to play. The field at Fielding, an amazing feature and resource for students and the wider community eg footabll clubs, playschemes in holidays, will be reduced in size - it is not clear by how much. This is a significant loss on many counts, the children love it, environmentally - we need all the green we can keep especially in London, for the curriculum in so many ways. The argument that the population increase in the local area is a valid reason because it is not fair that young children should have to travel far to school begs a number of questions - is this linked to new housing developments and were school places considered in the planning of these? is this also linked to a changing population in the area ie a significant increase in young families perhaps moving to the areas where good schools are available? If this latter is the case, people can expect that there may not be enough spaces in local schools and that it is a chance taken for us all when we move. It is not an argument for bigger, and not better, schools. Another issue is resources and council funding - is expansion of various schools a cheaper way,despite serious disavantages to the students themselves, surely our first priority - what educational research evidence do we actually have to support expansion of primaries to 4 form entry? In addition it is detrimental on all counts for local residents, road users, the environment - how can this be a good idea? Is the building of new schools not a better way? Is it that it's about the money, and not about the people or the environment at all? Why build all these new flats in this area if we cannot sustain the population - is this too about the money?
I urge you not to increase the size of Fielding primary School. I think it will be a big mistake for all concerned. I cannot understand why the school governors support this move - perhaps most don't?
49. Though my children did not attend Fielding Primary School we have many friends whose children do, or have attended, and my family have supported the school as part of our community by attending fund raising and other community events at and for the benefit of the school. That said none of this has changed our general perception that the school is not a good neighbour.
As to the current proposal there are a number of aspects to the proposal to increase the form intake of Fielding Primary School that cause me concern and I’ll outline them below;
Proposed building works & construction phase
o Fielding school has already been expanded in the last 6-8 years with the addition of new classrooms. Why does this school need to expand again so soon rather than expand or build other schools across the borough?
o Why is the consultation process so short, three weeks or so between the open meeting at the school and the closing date for comments, 13th February 2009?
o The school site is relatively large, approx 1.75 hectares and this proposal is to continue development on the northern side of the site. Can the development not be distributed more evenly across the entire site?
o The information pack provided on the open night was illegibly small. We were told this was to save paper however when the document is effectively useless all the paper is wasted! Having downloaded and printed off useable copies of the presentation I have some questions that are not answered on the night. These include?
o What exactly is the purpose of the contractor’s compound that will be directly behind our house in phase 2? o How long is it proposed to be there? o If it is proposed to include any site offices can you confirm these would be single storey? o What is our likely exposure to dust and noise over the duration of the building program? o How long is it anticipated the construction phase will go on for and would it continue during the school holidays. o Is it proposed construction activity be “ramped up” during school holidays? o Will any part of the building process diminish the amenity or privacy of our back garden?
o Given that our homes have been where they are for fifty plus years before the school arrived what binding guarantees will be given that this is the end of development on the site and there will be no further diminution of our privacy or the quality of life on our street?
Parking & traffic This is one of the biggest issues with this proposal. Our concerns are outlined in the points below;
o The residents of Wyndham Road have already rejected a proposal for one way traffic on this road. We would see it as Fielding Primary School being dismissive of and antagonistic towards local residents if this was to be proposed again either directly through the school development program or through the council in support of the program.
o Staff parking on Wyndham Road, which appears to be a permanent extension of the school’s own staff park, is already a point of annoyance for residents. Any expansion of the school must come with adequate parking spaces for projected staff numbers. At present I understand there are nine parking spaces for approximately sixty staff. At a rough guess I’d expect to see somewhere between 30 and 50 on site parking spaces on any viable expansion proposal. I believe residents close to any other place of employment would have similar strong and justified objections to residential parking being substituted for workplace parking.
o In the last year we have had additional competition for parking spaces near our homes on Saturday mornings with the advent of music classes in the school. I can tell you it is somewhat less than amusing to do the weekly grocery shop on a Saturday and have to carry your shopping 100 -200 yards or a couple of streets to your home.
o The point made in stakeholder update, January 2009, that none if this year’s reception intake live more than 1.05 miles from the school is totally irrelevant if they are still being driven to and collected from school in private cars. The same transport question arises on parent’s evenings, schools shows etc…. If the school’s intake is expanded the certainty is that the intake radius will grow attracting pupils who are even more likely to be driven to school than those in the current catchment area.
o The parking habits of parents/carers delivering and collecting pupils are already unappreciated by local residents examples include pulling up on the corner of Wyndham Road & Midhurst Road, not “parking” but occupying a space close enough to the school for a “quick collection”. This is a child safety issue and one we’ve never seen any member of Fielding staff monitor or take issue with, though the school does actively promote restricting residents parking close to the school gates.
o We have two neighbours on Wyndham Road who are eligible for disabled parking places. These spaces are very clearly marked on the road. It is not uncommon to see parents/carers parked in these spots and sitting in their cars waiting for children to exit the school. I think our disabled neighbours have every right to expect these places to be vacant when they need them and not to have to chivvy people out of them so they can park their cars and get into their homes.
In summary we say the following, “If the school were any other non-residential establishment we don’t believe these proposals would be entertained for even five minutes by either the council or the residents of adjoining streets.” We know the feeling among residents is that the school will take its normal dismissive view of our feelings and that we will need to mobilise and not be bullied on this matter.
With the proposed expansion of Heathrow Airport already threatening our quality of life only a proposal that strikes a balance between the school’s expansion ambitions while recognising the school’s current and likely future impact on residents will receive any degree of local support or agreement.
Can you please provide a timetable for this process or direct us to one that can be shared with concerned residents.
50. I am writing to object to the proposal to expand Fielding Primary School – in fact to object to expanding all the schools in the borough of Ealing. These proposals are the result of erroneous policies by Ealing Council and expanding local schools is not the way to make up for them.
Ealing Council has encouraged more and more people to live in the borough but has not taken into account the needs of these new families and provided sufficient schools, parks, doctors surgeries, etc. There is a lack of ‘joined up thinking!’ Then the council suddenly realised it needed hundreds of school places and demanded that local schools take in more pupils. Instead it should be planning ahead and looking to build a new primary school. I do not believe the council when it says it does not have a suitable site. The health centre in Mattock Lane, W5, is about to move and that would be an excellent place for a school. I understand that the NHS has to give priority to ‘community needs’ before it looks to sell the site to developers. I believe Ealing Council should build a school there and take the pressure off other local schools.
Fielding is an excellent school and, I am sure, will manage the change to four forms, if it is required to do so. However, it is against the ethos of modern primary education to have very young children in extremely large units – 120 pupils per year and 840 across the whole school. This would be like having a large factory of school children. The current senior leadership team at the school will cope extremely well, but at some point new people will come into the post and they may not be as qualified, meaning such a large school could decline and become a ‘sink school.’
The leadership at the school see the proposed expansion as a way of getting the infrastructure (staff rooms, toilets, meeting rooms, etc) that the school didn’t get when it was expanded from two forms to three forms. I don’t believe there is any reason to believe that they will get the extra space they feel they need. Already at the school there are problems with access, traffic, a lack of signage, objections from neighbours to noise from the school, etc. Expanding the school will just make these problems worse.
51. As a resident of Ridley Avenue, I am writing to object to the proposed enlargement of Fielding School?as I believe?the?project will have a negative impact on?the neighbourhood.
There is likely to be a significant?increase?in the volume of?traffic?at 'school-run' times and this will have?a major knock-on effect in terms of?the?safety of children arriving/leaving. ? I hope you and the School will consider these concerns.
52. As local residents and parents of 2 children at Fielding Primary School (Reception and Year 2), we are writing to state our objections to the proposed expansion:
1. The school is already overcrowded with the current number of pupils and an expansion will exacerbate the following issues:
• The building work may provide more classrooms but it will not increase the size of the corridors and common areas i.e.: toilets, Halls and Dining Room. As Mrs Reeves said at the consultation meeting “The circulatory space is not sufficient for the number of children”.
• The existing classrooms are already too small for the class sizes. It is difficult for the children to move around the tables in the classrooms without bumping in to each other and the very small area of carpet that they all have to squeeze onto to listen to the teacher is not conducive to positive learning environment, when they are all being bothered by each other’s feet and elbows. Not to mention getting too hot.
• We did hear that there is a plan to increase the size of one of the halls but that is not happening until Phase 2 in approx 3 years time. In the meantime, there will be even less space for the increased number of children and parents at events such as sharing assemblies.
• The same is true for the planned reclamation of some space in the Dining Hall. There already has to be a rotation system at lunch time because the dining room can’t accommodate all the children and that isn’t working either:
i. The older children have to wait too long for their lunch and often complain that they are starving by the time it is their turn
ii. Then there is hardly enough time left for them to eat their meal And also some of the options on the school dinners menu run out
iii. The younger ones are also pestered to finish their food quickly so that the next classes can be called in
iv. There have been instances where children have not heard their class being called in and missed their lunch completely
v. Supervision at lunch times also presents a problem and the younger children often don’t get enough assistance. Eg. If they choose something they don’t like the taste of, there’s no help to get something different and end up eating nothing at all.
2. The playground areas are overcrowded and consequently too busy:
• The children often report that they could not find their friends for the whole of the playtime and become distressed about it
• There are many accidents with smaller children being knocked over by the more boisterous older children
• The medical room is often full to capacity at break times with all the minor injuries. Mrs Lewis often struggles to cope.
• The proposed building work means that the Key Stage 1 playground will be closed, if not all of the time, then some of the time and the children will have to be corralled into an even smaller space.
3. There is already congestion at the Wyndham Road school entrance
• This will become worse when the numbers of pupils (and parents) increase. Especially when the Coombe Road entrance is closed due the proposed building work.
• A good example of this was demonstrated by how long it took all the children to file into school only using one entrance because of the recent heavy snowfall.
• At the meeting the council representative denied that more children would lead to more traffic with parents dropping off at school and the basis that all pupils lived within walking distance. However, parents will still drive as they then have to travel on to their workplace.
• Parking is already an issue for residents of Wyndham Road. Since there are only 9 parking spaces in the school and 62 members of staff, where will the new extra staff required park? What provisions are being made?
4. 300 Parents of current pupils are opposed to the expansion:
• A petition passed to the School Governors had the signatures of at least 300 parents who are opposed to the expansion. We understand that this is not being considered as part of the consultation process and the online petition which was created has not resulted in the same number of signatures (due to the fact that it was not possible to contact all of those parents by email).
• As a result of the parents views not being taken into consideration many people may become dissatisfied and consider moving their children to a different school. It’s possible that support for the PTFA will also dwindle.
5. The ‘Consultation Process’ doesn’t appear to be have been carried out properly and the proposal has been put forward as more or less a ‘fait accompli’
• It is a commonly held belief that the local residents and home owners (i.e. Landlords) have not been properly appraised of the situation and the full implications of the plans and proposed building works
• Questions arising at the consultation meeting about possible traffic calming measures such as CPZ’s and a ‘One Way System’ in Wyndham Road were not addressed by the council representative because these come under the control of the ‘Traffic’ department. Surely if they are a direct result of the expansion, references to them should be included in the consultation. We believe that they have intentionally been kept separate.
• The council have not made it very straight forward for interested parties to get sight of the plans and they were only first available at the school consultation meeting in a poorly photocopied format (halfway through the consultation period). The plans should have been put up on a wall in the school so that all parents could see them properly. The majority of parents have no idea of what building works are proposed.
6. If Fielding school is so outstanding and an “example for other schools around the country” the Council should be able to supply funding without forcing an increase in the number of pupils
• The funding would allow Fielding to maintain current teaching standards and move forward with the new curriculum
• Surely the council is obliged to maintain the condition of the buildings and provide a sanitary environment for the current children at the school. We make reference to Mrs Reeves comments regarding the dilapidated mobile classrooms (which are well past their “use by date”) and the poor state of the toilets.
• Increasing the number of pupils may have a detrimental effect. The school will become too big and impersonal and will not be the 1st choice of parents in the future.
• Will the plans for Phase 2 really go ahead? Or will the funds be used up by unforeseen costs during Phase 1 and the school will then be left with temporary buildings as it has now.
• Fielding is a feeder school for Elthorne Park High School. What plans have been made to accommodate the increased number of High School applicants if Fielding numbers are increased?
• If funding was used to improve the other local primary schools, such as Grange, Oaklands and St Johns, there wouldn’t be the issue of all the parents trying to get their children into Fielding. The council representative at the meeting stated that only 56 parents had put down the Grange as first choice when, in fact, there are 90 places.
• It is undeniable that the school requires funding to improve its current buildings and move forward with the new curriculum. However, the expansion of Fielding Primary school will not be beneficial to the current pupils and residents who will have to bear the years of building work and disruption.
7. Have the Council properly explored the alternatives, in light of the fact that these plans were made before the current economic downturn:
• Buying land to build a new school would now be considerably cheaper than when budgets were originally planned
• It is also worth considering that foreign settlers in the area may repatriate due to the UK economic situation (and the drive to prioritise jobs for UK workers) which in turn will reduce the number of children requiring school places
Creating such a large school in a predominantly residential area will make the buying of properties in the vicinity of the school a much less attractive option, due to the amount of disturbance. This, in turn, may lead to a reduction in the numbers of pupils applying to the school. The expansion then would be considered a pointless exercise and a waste of money.
53.
I would like to object to the recent proposal to increase the number of pupils admitted at Fielding Primary School to 120 per year from 2009/10. I have a ……. in reception and a …. who would be eligible to start school in Sept 2010.
My objection is based on a number of criteria: 1.. We have not been supplied with adequate information regarding catchment area. In Sept 2007, it would appear all pupils in catchment area who applied were successfully accommodated. 2008 saw a minor increase. It seems strange that there is such an increase (over 30%) for 2009. Why is this? Does the catchment area include new housing/flats? Is the catchment area changing or is it simply too large, given the changing socio-demographic make-up of the area? Are there other schools in the borough that are not full? We are lacking a lot of information. What is the number of placements required for Sept 2009 in the borough versus the number of current places on offer? Is it simply that catchment areas need to be reviewed? We need more information. 2.. Fielding is already a very large school - I understand there are no schools larger in the Borough. A year of 90 pupils is a lot for a 4 year old entering reception to contend with. 120 is inconceivable. This moves away from what a primary school should be all about - namely nurture and care in the early years. A 4 form entry school would make Fielding the largest primary school in the borough. 3.. The school's access/infrastructure can barely accommodate the current number of pupils - with frequent accidents involving pupils both at the Coombe Road and Wyndham Road gates. Plus, the parking is already impossible and adds undue stress and danger to the pupils' journey to school. Not to mention local congestion. As a resident of Wyndham Rd, as well as a parent of children at the school, it is inconceivable to increase numbers in the school before improving infrastructure, safety and parking.
The primary motivation for increasing the size of Fielding seems to be based on the funding to improve facilities. This is a poor argument - as a child's happiness and success at primary school is rarely based on facilities. The school/council should not be using this to sway opinions.
Increasing Fielding feels like a short-term fix that does not look into the longer term needs of the area. A much better solution would seem to be to build a new school. This would:
- Maintain a community feel
- Minimise congestion
- Provide the nurture and care a primary school child needs
- Provide more space for children
- Provide a longer term solution
A few sites and been quoted but a very obvious one is the Old Convent School on Northfields Ave, which is only currently used as a Muslim School on Saturday mornings. I am sure there are other sites too. I have heard there is a building next to St Marks which could also be expanded. These 2 sites together provide better catchment area boundaries - serving around Little Ealing and Fielding/Oakland, where there are the main problems.
As you can see, I, along with many other parents, feeling very strongly against this proposal and hope my views will be taken seriously into consideration.
54.
I am writing to express my concern over the proposed expansion of Fielding Primary School.
I also wish to express my concern at the apparent underhand way this proposal has been dealt with. As you can tell from my address I live just round the corner from the school and heard of it only because a friend told me. I would have expected the council to make some attempt at public consultation.
While I can understand that the council has to provide school places for children if the demand is increasing this does not seemto be a satisfactory solution for a number of reasons. As a local resident I am particularly concerned at the congestion which will result in the surrounding area. The surrounding streets are narrow and already congested, increasing the numbers attending the school in this way is not only going to make it unpleasant for all concerned but shift it from merely unpleasanat and inconvenient to positively dangerous.
It seems to me it will also change the character of the school, the sheer size will change it from a pleasant, friendly and inviting environment for these young children to something much more intimidating and threatening.
It would seem much wiser for the council to put a bit more time and thought to this issue to find a more satisfactory solution to the problem. Why not consider building a new school as part of the proposed redevelopment of Ealing Broadway Centre. A school placed there would be accessible to a much wider area and therefore a much more flexible and useful resource and would be a useful development rather than what has been suggested so far.
55. I am writing to express my concern about the proposed expansion of Fielding School. These concerns are summarised below -
* Have all other options (eg building a new school in the Borough) been fully explored? * It is already a large school, and I am extremely concerned that expanding it further will adversely affect educational standards at the school * Expansion will no doubt involve taking children from outside the current catchment area. This will mean that more kids will be taken to school by car which will result in increased congestion in local roads and will also increase the chances of an accident near the school - as well as being very environmentally unfriendly... * I feel that it is a "quick-fix" solution that hasn't been thought through properly.
56. Please find attached a list of parents who are still concerned about the expansion of Fielding Primary School.
These were collected in an online petition which you can see at... http://www.
There are 59 signees (see the attached .xls file spreadsheet), all of who gave their address and email details to us in confidence, ie: not for publication. We would ask that you respect this, and are providing them only to you for verification purposes. You are able to use their names.
We have registered our concerns in regard to the proposed expansion of Fielding Primary School from three to four forms of entry because we feel that...
1. The expansion plans are being rushed through by Ealing Council, who have not properly explored all other available options,
2. The expansion is already being presented to parents and residents as a "done deal" before the full consultation period has even elapsed,
3. No research has been presented to parents to establish how the welfare and education of our children might suffer - both during the years of building works required to expand the school, and as a result of the hugely increased pupil numbers.
We want Ealing Council to stop its expansion plans for Fielding and other schools in the borough with immediate effect, and properly explore the option of building a new school to accommodate the increased number of primary school age pupils here.
This petition was sent to only those parents we had email addresses for and out of the 104 the initial email was sent to 59 have signed the petition - that represents a response rate of 57%.
We had two emails sent to us supporting the expansion.
We hope you will also take into account the widespread views of parents, extend the consultation period and look into alternative options.
57. I am writing as a local resident to register my opposition to the proposed expansion of Fielding Primary School, which was indeed expanded not too long ago to 3 form entry.
Both my children (now teenagers) attended Fielding and I therefore have been connected with the school in the past, and it is a colourful and significant part of our neighbourhood. However, increasing the school to 4 form entry - ie by 33% - would in my view be detrimental for the school children themselves (Fielding is already sizeable for a primary school) and for the local area. The school is situated in the middle of a network of narrow residential streets and the increase in traffic would be not merely inconvenient but potentially dangerous especially for the substantially increased numbers of children making their way too and from school. As more children would be coming from further afield the number of cars is also likely to be increased by considerably more than 33%.
58.
As a teacher and local resident I would like to raise objections to the proposal of extending Fielding Primary school to eventually take in over 800 children. I would also object to the proposals to develop any of our primary schools beyond a three year in take and, actually as a teacher with over 35 years experience I would like to see primary schools with only a two year intake. a) Primary schools offer young children, from 3- 11 years old, the benefit of being known by all staff - a school of over 800 cannot provide this, it is as large as a small secondary school b) Primary schools can offer security and the feeling of "belonging" to all its children - once again a school of 800 cannot provide this. Staff cannot know the ins and outs of the children's background, their individual needs, their different learning strategies, their strengths and weaknesses, their social skills or lack of them, their friendship groups, etc, all the daily knowledge that teachers have in a "regular" size primary school about each and every child. c) By the time you get to 800 you are a member of a Year group, not an individual child, and surely we need to give them that experience and security of being known individually so that they can move on to our large High Schools with the confidence developed by being in a small and secure environment. d) The Fielding site is a reasonable size at the moment but if you continue to develop on the space, the playground / sport areas will no longer be as attractive as they are now. e) How are these large primary schools ever going to have large enough halls for whole school assemblies. Large enough dining rooms for all to have lunch at a reasonable time? Split lunchtimes means some are trying to work whilst others are playing - a noise issue can be a problem. f) If the buildings are to be two storey then lifts will have to be provided to ensure access for all. g) The traffic and parking, near the school, at the beinning and end of the day is always a problem and as more and more people bring their children from further away the traffic congestion will increase. h) Local people near the school will probably have other objections as, I presume, any two storey buildings built will take away some of their privacy. i) Fielding might have got an "outstanding" for its last Ofsted but it will be difficult to maintain the quality of teaching and learning with a larger intake and more staff. If the council continues to expand popular schools - Fielding was 2 form entry, now 3 form entry, soon to be 4 and then 5 and 6 - when do you stop? Where is your forward planning - you cannot just keep extending the "good" schools! j) There is no advantage for the children in being in larger primary school, only savings to the borough of building, maintaining and funding a new school. k) As there appears to be a need to extend so many schools in the borough (Little Ealing, St John's - where do they have space to expand?) it would seem that the council needs to consider its long term forward planning. The long term needs of Ealing could be met by building a new school / schools which would keep all our primary school sizes to a reasonable level. Then all the above points would be covered. l) In the end the parents who are so keen to get their children into a "good" school will discover that their 3-11 year old child is not well known by Head or deputy or teachers in the school. How sad that we cannot provide chldren with the security that some so desperately need. m) I cannot remember the statistics but what about the number of abused and neglected children in school who are not always identified in small schools today - how will they ever be identified in large "secondary" sized primary schools?
59.
I am responding to your consultation of primary schools in central Ealing, particularly those for Little Ealing and Fielding.
I think the expansion should be treated holistically, rather than on an individual school basis. I also think that options should be investigated and put forward for public consultation, as they were for the Council's recycling arrangements.
The particular other schemes I think you need to consider are:-
1) Adding another form to Grange instead of Little Ealing. Space available for expansion was previously seen as a key criteria for deciding which schools to expand. Grange is also only slightly down the pecking order in popularity from Little Ealing and with a slightly better Value Added score. It certainly has more space available on site than Little Ealing, has a design more suited for expansion, and has Council unsold land immediately to the north should more space be required. Building there would be much less disruptive (and probably cheaper) than building at Little Ealing.
2) Build a new 2 form entry school on Popefield playing fields. This site was previously considered as a potential one for the new Grange school. Then shift westward the catchment areas of Fielding, Little Ealing and Grange schools. Again, this would be less disruptive (and probably cheaper) than building on the sites of schools in current use.
60.
I am writing to express my concerns re the proposed expansion to 4 form entry at Fielding Primary School. 1. The school is already of a considerable size and although the school mix the classes every 2 years it still takes the children a considerable amount of time to get to know all of the children in their year, surely any further increase will just lengthen this period. 2. The increased human traffic within the school at 3.30 as parents have to move around the site to collect their children from their respective years. 3. The increase in traffic around the surrounding streets. Although the school promote walking to school many parents drive in so that they can then go straight on to work and likewise after school. The volume of traffic is noticeably higher between 8.50 & 9.05 and then 3.15 to 3.45 and again increases when the weather is bad. Parking for residents between these times is virtually nonexistent. And despite having no parking outside the school gates drivers still persist in stopping on the tables and even blocking the crossing openings. 4. What guarantees do we have that funds will be available to complete both phases of the works and that the school will not be left with portacabins for class rooms as happened with the last expansion at Fielding. 5. According to the EGFL as at the week end 13/2/09 in KS2 there were 26 vacancies. If the school increases in size will it not follow that this figure will increase? As the schools budget is directly linked to the number of pupils will this not lead to financial shortfalls?
6. Will the building works not disrupt life at the school for the existing pupils, loss of space in the playground and increased noise?
61.
We would like to voice our objection to the above expansion of Fielding Primary School.
We feel that the school will become too large, with all of the inherent problems of increased traffic, as well as parking problems at weekends when extra-curricular events are held at the school.
We also believe that the majority of school parents are against the expansion.
62.
I would like to object to the proposed expansion to Fielding School on the grounds that it will make the school too large. I believe that Ealing Council should analyse where the demand is coming from, i.e. the area of population growth, and put a new school in the centre of that geographical area - if high birth rates are the cause of the problem.
One of the reasons I like Fielding is that it is our local school and our children can walk to it. I also like Fielding because of the high standard of education that is available, which I think makes it an attractive school to many parents.
This standard of education I believe means that a large number of children who attend Fielding live outside the current catchment, i.e. sibling entries. I asked for a breakdown of the in zone/out of zone numbers (in all years) at the meeting on 26th January but was told that this information "Was not available". I was flabbergasted. I know of a family who rented for a number of years a house in the catchment to get their oldest child into Fielding and then moved back to their family home which is out of zone - as it is a better house although in the catchment of a poorer performing school. The child stayed at Fielding and the younger siblings now also attend Fielding. I believe that this is wrong and that the school should only accept children who live in the zone - if they move home they should move school. I suspect that this is not an isolated case, hence my question, to which I still would like an answer.
As a result of this there are too many cars dropping children off at the school - the streets are congested at the start and end of the day, presumably because they live too far from the school to walk, i.e. out of zone siblings. There has been a significant number of documented cases of near accidents. If the school expands and the policy does not change, this problem can only get worse whereas if Fielding took children from a small local catchment the problem would reduce, if not disappear.
Furthermore, at the same meeting I asked the council representative for an indication of the council's plans to school the children who will live at the new development at Ealing Broadway - there must be some estimates of the places required. I gave my email address to the speaker from the council who has not yet responded to my question (18 days later). This makes me wonder does the council have a plan. I would still appreciate an answer to this question, as would a number of parents I have spoken to
63.
I am writing to ask you to encourage the Council to look for an alternative to the proposed expansion of Fielding School. My house backs onto the school and we will be adversely affected by traffic congestion if the expansion goes ahead. This school is already too large to be at the centre of an estate of Edwardian houses in narrow roads. Introducing one-way systems would be no solution since speeding up the traffic would create more danger for the children who do walk to school. We ourselves would not be in favour of that idea or any other traffic management scheme which would constrain our movement. In order to alleviate the demand for places at Fielding, would it not be more sensible to reduce the catchment area so that children from the eastern side of Northfields Avenue and south of the Piccadilly tube-line go to schools in the centre and south of Ealing? The roads there are much wider and more able to accommodate the increase in traffic which would result from a new or expanded school. This would free up places at Fielding for those children on the boundary of the catchment area around Southdown Road and who have no alternatives. Having talked to some of the parents at the school, it seems that many children currently attending do not live in the catchment. Once a child out of catchment is given a place, I gather that the child’s siblings are then guaranteed a place. At the public meeting, the Head could not supply data on how many were out of catchment and perhaps this all needs to be scrutinised more closely. I was even more dismayed to hear that there is a proposal to open an entrance onto Fielding Walk, a strategy that will increase the congestion problem by encouraging parents to use additional dropping off points in Midhurst Road and Northcroft Road. One more hazardous entrance for school staff to police doesn’t seem sensible and the children will have just as far to walk to the buildings. Besides which, this stretch of grass is frequently used as a dog toilet and is a common meeting place for vandals, bottle smashers and dope smokers who over the years have destroyed the seats and vandalised trees. Fielding Walk is secluded and what goes on there cannot be seen from the nearby roads. Do you consider this to be a safe place for primary age school children? I am a teacher in this authority and I fully sympathise with the difficulties caused by a rising demand for places. Our own children, now grown-up, benefitted from a good education at Fielding and we wouldn’t wish to deny this to others. I just wonder if Fielding were to become so large whether staff would be able to maintain their currently outstanding performance and whether the children would be so happy to be there. There is more to a child’s education than academic standards. Our children knew that the Head knew them and they valued this. Will a child who is one of 840 feel that sense of belonging? Is it also reasonable that parents who can afford houses in this area move here to get into the catchment and the offspring of those not so well off go to the other schools? As the school expands, teachers of a higher quality will naturally be attracted to it. Fielding may well continue to be a school of excellence but other local schools will be all the poorer because of it. For the benefit of all, don’t you think that other schools in the area should be helped to catch up with Fielding?
Expanding the school would cause increased congestion, create unequal opportunities for children in the area and further anger residents who already tolerate a great deal of intrusion from the school. Will you please consider the disadvantages of expanding Fielding and instead create space in schools better situated to cope. Thank you.
64.
As residents of Northfields for the past 13 years and with 2 children currently attending Fielding School we are extremely concerned about the proposal to enlarge the school to 4 form entry per year.
Our childrens experience at the school continues to be very good with the school working incredibly hard to keep the atmosphere of a small, nurturing environment even though it is already one of the largest primary schools in the UK. Increasing the size further will make it closer in size to a secondary school and would be extremely damaging as primary schools thrive on being a small community. Even with the school at its current size there are issues which will be compounded if expansion goes ahead:
• The system of lunch shifts at present is far from ideal with the children allocated 10 minutes to eat their lunch and can only worsen with enlargement. • Playtime shifts to deal with numbers will be disruptive to the many ground floor classrooms that face on to the playgrounds. • Current shared assemblies that include both parents and all siblings are a great way of feeling involved with the children’s education and good confidence builder for them. It is hard to believe that with the increase in year size this will be-able to continue. • Increasing the size of the school gives rise to safety issues. A primary school which is too large leaves itself open to the danger of unwanted strangers being able to move about more easily within the school. At present most adults recognise other parents by sight, even if they haven’t spoken to them.
Other serious concerns include: • The impact on the childrens education and environment during the building works as well as the local area. • The long term impact on the community with an increase in traffic and parking around the school which even now is unsatisfactory and at school drop off time hazardous for our children crossing the roads.
The outstanding Ofsted report of 2008 will obviously attract many more new parents to the area, however by enlarging the school there is a real risk of spoiling what is so good about it. A school needs space for children to learn and grow. Let an excellent school remain excellent; don’t continue to throw more children at it until it breaks.
We feel this proposal is being put forward to save the council ‘a few quid’ with total disregard for the well- being of our children and the wider community. The council has allowed huge residential developments in the past few years without any thought about amenities or contingencies to invest in infrastructure. This is not the fault of the children at Fielding, don’t make them pay for the Councils mistakes.
We are asking you as representatives for our community to demand that the council seriously reconsiders this hastily put together plan that is being pushed through quickly without careful consideration. Ealing needs a new primary school in a new location
65.
I am writing to offer my complete support to the proposed enlargement to Fielding Primary School. I also support the whole plan for enlarging other schools in the council. Ealing Council has presented very well funded numbers showing that the number of young kids and pupils in the council is growing very fast. It is, therefore, absolutely the right decision for the council to enlarge some of the schools in order to accommodate those pupils. I believe the council is acting as a responsible authority in enlarging the schools.
I have just one further comment: it is clear that even this year there is a stronger demand for places at the local schools. So, I would certainly back the expansion on vacancies for reception year from this September (2009) rather than only from next year. I believe the council must act very quickly to accommodate the strong demand for places at the local schools.
Please, keep doing the very good job in education as you guys are doing at the moment.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
Little Ealing Primary School
1. I am writing regarding the proposed expansion of Little Ealing Primary and to express my opposition to the plan. I am the parent of a child currently in Y2 at the school and also live in a street close by the school. My objections are as follows :
1. Lack of space. This is the major issue. It is hard to believe that anybody who has actually visited the school during term time (as opposed to during the holidays) could seriously suggest that there is room for expansion. a) The playground is simply too small, with no green space, as it is; we are supposed to be encouraging our children to run around more, not less. b) There is huge congestion of pedestrians around the entrance gate at the start and end of school. c) There is already a lack of space for individual teaching eg remedial - some of these sessions are taking place in corridors as it is. d) the hall is barely large enough for whole-school gatherings in the school's current size. e) there will not be enough 'hall time' for PE classes with 6 extra classes in the school.
2. Traffic congestion. The Council's assertion that none of the children offered a place in this year's Reception lived more than 0.33 of a mile from the school is disingenuous because it does not include siblings. The siblings who live towards the fringes of the catchment (having moved once the eldest child gained a place) are precisely the people who drive to school. Increasing the catchment area in real terms will greatly increase traffic congestion. I am very concerned about the impact on my road (Netherbury Road) with cars jockeying for road and parking space each morning when we are trying to negotiate our way to school - Weymouth Avenue is already difficult to cross at school drop-off and pick-up times.
3. The ethos / feel of the school. This will be terribly affected by expansion. All proper academic reports have indicated that children do better in a smaller more intimate environment. The reason the school is popular is because of its atmosphere. Remove that and you remove the very reason people want their children to go there.
4. By the Council's own admission the number of first choice applications fell in the last year for which figures were available. Demographically I believe that migrant workers have had a major impact on the applications for places. It appears that numbers of those are returning home due to the economic downturn which will again reduce the demand for places. Therefore the Council is at risk of undertaking a large and expensive capital project which will become redundant before it is completed.
I believe that the Council has not properly investigated alternatives such as other sites or expanding other less popular schools which have more space. I hope that the objections of people affected by the proposed expansion will be given proper weight during the consultation.
1.a Thank you for your e-mail. I have some new points to raise. I would appreciate if you could please forward them to the relevant person to deal with.
1. We were supposed to have a chance to look at the plans on Monday and Tuesday this week. As the school was closed those days we were unable to do so. Please advise if the consultation period will be extended to allow parents and other stakeholders to view the plans in detail.
2. I was aghast during the public meeting to learn that the Council is proposing to carry out 18 months of building works adjacent to the school while the school is still running. How is it proposed to properly separate these building works from the main school particularly with regard to health and safety issues? I believe that the Council's belief in the probity of their building contractor is extremely naive. Main contractors subcontract the individual parts of the building works to the lowest bidder. Therefore we could have anybody on site. How does the Council intend to ensure the safety of our children during the works? Has an independent health and safety assessment been carried out by an outside consultant? How does the Council propose to ensure that the education of the children in the school will not be compromised?
3. How are tiered lunchtimes supposed to work? It is unacceptable for some children to be eating at 11.30 and others at 1pm. Therefore we would like to know how the Council proposes the school handle this issue.
4. How does the Council propose to minimise the impact of tiered playtimes in terms of classes being disturbed by children playing outside?
5. Has an independent assessment of fire safety in the new proposed building been carried out? From what I briefly saw of the sketches given out at the meeting, both exits from the complex involve passing through gates attached to buildings. What happens if the main building is on fire? How does the Council propose to get 620 children a safe distance away from a burning building in the existing space?
6. What is the minimum permitted m2 per child in schools? How do the plans proposed for Little Ealing compare to the m2 existing per child in other schools in Ealing? Particularly Grange and Fielding.
7. I understand that if you propose to put portakabins on the existing playground space you have to carry out a further consultation in the event that the portakabin is to be on site for more than year and/or increase pupil numbers by more than 27. We would appreciate confirmation of this as it seemed to be implied that if parents continued to oppose the expansion then we would have portakabins instead.
8. What is the breakdown of the proposed capital investment in the school in the event of expansion? How much will be spent on the building works and how much will be to provide new specialist rooms/equipment etc. What is the timescale for the investment not relating to the new building works?
9. Why has the possibility of changing catchment areas been discarded? The Councillor at the meeting stated that this was 'a minefield'. Surely not more of a minefield than cramming an extra 200 children into a small school. The expansion is unlikely to solve the problem of children in the extreme south of catchment not getting into the school. In addition parents from the north end of catchment routinely drive to school, often passing close by Grange and Fielding in the process. The roads round the school are already crowded at school run times. Has a traffic assessment been carried out recently?
1.b Sorry on re-reading this I realised I did not particularly mean to imply I was expecting replies to everything, they are really rhetorical questions outlining my further objections! Please include them in the consultation.
1.c I refer to the DCSF document regarding the obligation of local authorities to respond to parental representation about the provision of schools. You have a statutory duty to investigate and discuss the provision of a new school with parents. Expanding Little Ealing is the lazy way of obtaining more places and will not work. There is not room. The works will have a seriously detrimental effect on the education of children already in the school. Below are alternative proposals.
*BUILD A SCHOOL IN BLONDIN PARK AND MAKE LITTLE EALING A PARK*
This could also apply to a site in Lamas Park next to Culmington Road or Walpole Park Near Matock Lane
I propose that a new three form entry school be built in Blondin Park and that the current Site of Little Ealing School be made into a park including a five aside football pitch, play area and gardens. Some small amount of suitable building could also be left for community use.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are :
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. The new school would be wholly new and be cheaper to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would back on to the train tracks and front onto the park. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site.
*BUILD A SCHOOL IN GUNNERSBURY PARK * I propose that a new school be built in Gunnersbury Park. A new large school could easily fit into Gunnersbury park near to the junction of Popes Lane and Lionel Road without any significant loss of space in the park.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are :
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
*BUILD A SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS AT BLONDIN PARK*
Building a school on the allotments would be allowed if the allotments were relocated. The allotments could be relocated to the site near Almond Avenue that was apparently considered for a new school but was rejected before the consultation.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are :
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. The new school would be wholly new and be cheaper to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would back on to the train tracks and front onto the park. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
*BUILD A NEW SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS NEAR RANELAGH ROAD*
This plan is similar to 'BUILD A SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS AT BLONDIN PARK'
*LEASE/SHARE FACILITIES AT KING FAHAD ACADEMY*
The council stated that the negotiations with the owners of the King Fahad Academy building consisted of "Do you want to sell the property", "No". It is quite obvious that the Saudi government will not want to simply sell a piece of prime real estate in this economic climate and it is also apparent that the council need to be more creative in their approach to possibilities.
The site is only currently used at the weekends. There is the possibility of sharing the facilities. There is also another building on the site which is derelict and dates from the 50's or 60's. This building is not used at all. The leasing of this building should be investigated.
*BUILD A NEW SCHOOL IN THE INDUSTRIAL AREA IN WINDMILL ROAD*
The industrial area in Windmill Road currently houses a number of businesses. Two adjacent may be available. The first is already empty and the second is current the BBC archives which are due to close soon.
The new school would be wholly new and be cheap to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would be away from residences. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
2. I have objected to your proposal to expand Little Ealing Primary School on many grounds. One of them is that your department has not properly investigated alternative plans. In your recent reply to the governors’ questions you often relied on the fact that all land in Ealing is either owned by somebody or is an open space and somehow protected. You have overstated the degree of protection afforded to this land, there are many precedents for building on open spaces, purchasing land and moving allotments. I also find that by your own reckoning, the expansion is not value for money. If a three form entry school costs £12m and you are spending £5 on one form at Little Ealing then you are not spending our money wisely. When you add to the case of building a new school, the fact that this would provide choice for parents and may create a school next to a park which would make better use of the LA land available, then your not considering these proposals is foolish indeed.
So I am submitting these proposals and asking parents to support them. They need to be considered in line with “Duty to Respond to Parental Representations about the Provision of Schools”
BUILD A SCHOOL IN BLONDIN PARK AND MAKE LITTLE EALING A PARK
This could also apply to a site in Lamas Park next to Culmington Road or Walpole Park Near Matock Lane
I propose that a new three form entry school be built in Blondin Park and that the current Site of Little Ealing School be made into a park including a five aside football pitch, play area and gardens. Some small amount of suitable building could also be left for community use.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are :
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. The new school would be wholly new and be cheaper to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would back on to the train tracks and front onto the park. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site.
BUILD A SCHOOL IN GUNNERSBURY PARK
I propose that a new school be built in Gunnersbury Park. A new large school could easily fit into Gunnersbury park near to the junction of Popes Lane and Lionel Road without any significant loss of space in the park.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are :
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
BUILD A SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS AT BLONDIN PARK
Building a school on the allotments would be allowed if the allotments were relocated. The allotments could be relocated to the site near Almond Avenue that was apparently considered for a new school but was rejected before the consultation.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are :
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. The new school would be wholly new and be cheaper to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would back on to the train tracks and front onto the park. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
BUILD A NEW SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS NEAR RANELAGH ROAD
This plan is similar to ‘BUILD A SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS AT BLONDIN PARK’
LEASE/SHARE FACILITIES AT KING FAHAD ACADEMY
The council stated that the negotiations with the owners of the King Fahad Academy building consisted of “Do you want to sell the property”, “No”. It is quite obvious that the Saudi government will not want to simply sell a piece of prime real estate in this economic climate and it is also apparent that the council need to be more creative in their approach to possibilities.
The site is only currently used at the weekends. There is the possibility of sharing the facilities. There is also another building on the site which is derelict and dates from the 50’s or 60’s. This building is not used at all. The leasing of this building should be investigated.
BUILD A NEW SCHOOL IN THE INDUSTRIAL AREA IN WINDMILL ROAD
The industrial area in Windmill Road currently houses a number of businesses. Two adjacent may be available. The first is already empty and the second is current the BBC archives which are due to close soon.
The new school would be wholly new and be cheap to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would be away from residences. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
2.a Two things
1. Just to clarify that the email that I was intending to send and those that I hope others will send are not exclusively comments on school expansion. They are proposals for alternatives for your department to consider in line with the document "Duty to Respond to Parental Representations about the Provision of Schools". Can you confirm that these submissions should also be sent to Holly. Considering that these representations will need to be examined at a high level I thought that directing them directly to Mr Redhead may be more appropriate.
2. As you stated in your email, there is going to be another public meeting at the school. Since I replied to your last email I have learned that there will be no representative from your department at the meeting. I am most disappointed. The proposal to expand the school originates from your department and the governors have admitted that they have very little detail other than that contained in the proposal document which, in itself struggles to cover the bare minimum required by regulation. This meeting will be a case of the blind leading the blind. I believe that it is incumbent on your department to answer questions posed by concerned parents. I believe that this is an important part of a consultation; that the proposer of the action is available to answer questions of those most affected.
To be honest, I think that arranging a meeting without representation from your department is bordering on contempt for a democratic process and I'm wondering whether the Local Government Ombudsman agrees with my view.
Will your department reconsider sending somebody to the meeting?
2.b TWO THINGS,
ONE - I would like to object in the strongest terms to the expansion of Little Ealing Primary School. My objection is for the following reasons.
1. The change is not in the best interests of my child. 2. The changes are not in the best interest of the school or the local community 3. The expansion of an existing school reduces choice for parents. There should be a new school built 4. The congestion in the area would be intolerable 5. The ethos of the school would be damaged 6. The quality of education at the school would be reduced 7. The council have not properly investigated alternatives. 8. The council will not address the catchment area problem 9. The staff at the school are against the change 10. The governors are against the change 11. The children are against the change 12. The parents are against the change
TWO - Will the objections for the previous consultation be included in the statutory consultation ? Please reply to this point
2.c You may be aware that I am wholly against the expansion of Little Ealing Primary school. This is on the grounds that better alternatives have not been properly investigated. I propose to document these alternatives and submit them to your department. Could you let me know which email address I should use for this submission. I also plan to encourage others to support my alternative plan by submitting emails and cannot say how many emails this would mean. Maybe two, maybe two hundred (probably nearer two). My plan is to encourage debate and gain support against the proposal, not to clog up an inbox.
3. I would like to express my concern with regard to the possibility of expanding Little Ealing Primary School.
I have been very fortunate to get places for both of my children at Little Ealing, my daughter has now left and is in High School and my son is currently in year 3, however, the reason that ……… got a place at Little Ealing several years ago was because a 3rd class was allowed due to such high numbers requiring a place there.
It sounds very hypocritical of me to say this, because it was to our advantage that a third form gave …….. the chance of a place despite being out of catchment, but there is no doubt over the years that …. spent there, that there was a knock on effect due to the lack of space and facilities and frankly overcrowding within the classrooms and at assemblies etc.
I feel that the same kind of confinement and overcrowding will occur during the building stages and upon completion, there is only so much ground space at Little Ealing and the children already have very little room at play time so there is no doubt that to use up further space in the playground for new buildings will have an adverse effect on the children during their playtime.
My son ……. spent almost two years at Grange School awaiting a place at Little Ealing, and this was during the time that Grange was being rebuilt, therefore he spent all the time there in Portacabins, and I can comment from experience that this is not a satisfactory environment in which to develop and learn, they had virtually no playground area, with children of all ages, from Nursery upwards having to share the same confined area, and despite the good will and hard work of the teachers there, the whole situation felt very cooped up and frustrating for the children during the build. Typically, we made the move to Little Ealing just as Grange was completed, and I have no doubt that the school now feels a lot larger and has many wonderful facilities, but the interim stage was not pleasant, and I do not want ……… to have to go through that again at Little Ealing especially as I feel that there simply is not room to expand within the grounds.
I would urge you to please reconsider any thoughts of expanding Little Ealing and to consider your alternatives, surely there is a school with larger grounds which can be expanded and then future parents can have a decent option of placing their children in an environment with plenty space and not to spoil a very popular school by increasing the amount of children and lessening the amount of space it simply does not make sense.
Finally, as we are out of catchment, I drive to school, which I know does not help the situation, but …….is not quite ready to cycle to school, and currently the chaos which occurs every morning around the school, simply to find a place to park and the congestion is only just bearable, therefore I can not imagine how it will be when there are many more staff and many more parents all fighting for a parking space in the future.
There are many parents who feel the same way as I do, I am not one to object simply for the sake of it, and would ask that you please take our comments seriously, we all have the future of our children to think of, and feel that there really ought to be a better way ahead other than continue with your plans to expand Little Ealing.
4. I wish to support the above proposal to enlarge Little Ealing Primary School as I agree we are heading for an educational crisis in the Borough. We have lived in Ealing for 20 years and therefore are not transient workers residing in the Borough for a relatively short time. We would also point out that we have a long term investment in the Borough as homeowners and have dutifully paid our Council tax for all this time.
Now that we have a daughter who is due to start school shortly, we thinkwe deserve every chance of finding her a place in a local school. We therefore welcome your consultation and hope it is passed.
5. I object most strongly to the proposed expansion of Little Ealing Primary School.
To increase the number of pupils to the proposed levels is unacceptable for such a small site. Staggered playtimes and assemblies would mean that PE lessons both indoor and outdoor would be limited in a curriculum which already provides little enough time for these elements of education. Remember that LEPS currently has Healthy School status. Staggered playtimes and assemblies also would cause huge disruption and noise around the school having a detrimental effect on children's concentration levels and learning experience.
Gone would be the nurturing caring family atmosphere of the school where the head teacher knows every pupil by name, then bursting at the seams in an overstretched site. The proposed changes would adversely affect the ethos of the school. What makes the school so desirable now would be gone.
The suggested 18 month construction period would provide unacceptable disruption to the school and would cause intolerable congestion in the area with all the vehicles associated with major building work. You should be aware by now how congested the area is already around drop-off and collection times, particularly with all the traffic to and from Mount Carmel School. I have been concerned about the safety of my children while walking to school with me along Little Ealing Lane for the past six years and have complained to Mount Carmel school about the reckless driving and parking by some of its parents. I am also aware that the traffic on Weymouth Avenue at these times is equally heavy. Construction vehicle traffic, followed by an increase in parents vehicles and those on foot would increase the current congestion problems to an unacceptable level. The large increase in staff required would mean far more parking needed at the school. There simply is not the space.
It is plain to see that the council has not properly investigated alternative sites. Enlarging Little Ealing Primary school is an idea borne out of apathy. It would damage the school and is not in the best interests of the children. It would also do nothing to increase parental choice.
I urge you not to proceed with your proposed plans to enlarge Little Ealing but instead to thoroughly and intelligently investigate accommodating the extra children in more suitable and viable ways which will be good for all.
5.a I understand it is the duty of the council to investigate and discuss with parents the provision of a new school if it is demanded (Ref: "Duty to Respond to Parental Representations about the Provision of Schools"). In the light of the current proposals to expand Little Ealing Primary School, which I find unacceptable, I present you with my proposals for building a new school:
BUILD A SCHOOL IN BLONDIN PARK AND MAKE LITTLE EALING A PARK
This could also apply to a site in Lamas Park next to Culmington Road or Walpole Park Near Matock Lane
I propose that a new three form entry school be built in Blondin Park and that the current Site of Little Ealing School be made into a park including a five aside football pitch, play area and gardens. Some small amount of suitable building could also be left for community use.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are :
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. The new school would be wholly new and be cheaper to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would back on to the train tracks and front onto the park. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site.
BUILD A SCHOOL IN GUNNERSBURY PARK
I propose that a new school be built in Gunnersbury Park. A new large school could easily fit into Gunnersbury park near to the junction of Popes Lane and Lionel Road without any significant loss of space in the park.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are :
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
BUILD A SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS AT BLONDIN PARK
Building a school on the allotments would be allowed if the allotments were relocated. The allotments could be relocated to the site near Almond Avenue that was apparently considered for a new school but was rejected before the consultation.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are:
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. The new school would be wholly new and be cheaper to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would back on to the train tracks and front onto the park. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
BUILD A NEW SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS NEAR RANELAGH ROAD
This plan is similar to 'BUILD A SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS AT BLONDIN PARK'
LEASE/SHARE FACILITIES AT KING FAHAD ACADEMY
The council stated that the negotiations with the owners of the King Fahad Academy building consisted of "Do you want to sell the property", "No". It is quite obvious that the Saudi government will not want to simply sell a piece of prime real estate in this economic climate and it is also apparent that the council need to be more creative in their approach to possibilities.
The site is only currently used at the weekends. There is the possibility of sharing the facilities. There is also another building on the site which is derelict and dates from the 50's or 60's. This building is not used at all. The leasing of this building should be investigated.
BUILD A NEW SCHOOL IN THE INDUSTRIAL AREA IN WINDMILL ROAD
The industrial area in Windmill Road currently houses a number of businesses. Two adjacent may be available. The first is already empty and the second is current the BBC archives which are due to close soon.
The new school would be wholly new and be cheap to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would be away from residences. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
6. I am a current (catchment) parent at Little Ealing Primary School with children in years 3 and 5. My youngest son will start in September 2010. I am very familiar with the arguments both for and against a three form entry at Little Ealing.
I strongly believe that in a catchment system, a school should be able to offer all of the children in it's catchment a school place if they want one. This is clearly not just a case of expanding schools, but judging in the context of a wider hinterland which catchments are oversubscribed and altering catchments if need be to redistribute demand.
I am also very familiar with the amenity which is currently afforded to children at Little Ealing by extremely creative use of a, frankly, quite cramped site. I do think that this would be endangered by expanding the school.
I understand that this expansion proposal started with the premise that the wider South Ealing area was going to have too many primary age children to be accommodated by the South Ealing schools i.e. Oaklands, Fielding, Mount Carmel, Grange and Little Ealing given that the vision and strategy was that children at primary age can attand local schools within walking distance. I have direct knowledge of Grange Primary - a three form entry school -as my oldest son attended it for his reception year. I continue to maintain strong links with the school. I am aware that Grange is able to accomodate children from other areas of the Borough, e.g. Acton, Hanwell, Greenford and Southall and even children from outside the Borough e.g. Harrow, Willesden and Wembley. This surely calls into question the validity of the information upon which this expansion proposal is based. If Grange can take large numbers of children - and I know this to be the case from the intake of 2007 - from elsewhere in or outside the Borough, there must be spare places so why not ring fence those places for South Ealing children? This would seem to be the fundamental first action to take to deal with the issue before expansions are even contemplated.
I am very concerned that this simple piece of work has not been done by the Council and I think you need to demonstrate that all the South Ealing schools, for avoidance of doubt this means south of the Uxbridge Road, were completely full with children living in South Ealing at the September 2008 intake. If not, please go back to the drawing board before wasting further taxpayers money.
6.a Yes but if Grange is still able to take children from outside the local area at all, presumably there is not an undersupply of places in South Ealing so why are already cramped schools being asked to expand ? Why not expand a school in North Ealing, Perivale, Acton, Hanwell because I'd have thought pretty much any other school would have more room than Little Ealing. Or better still, build a new one.
7.
As a parent of two children at Little Ealing Primary School, I am writing to object to the proposed expansion of the school. I am copying this e-mail to the local councillors.
My objection is largely based on the lack of physical space at the site. Inparticular: a) The outdoor space is already limited, and the sports provision weak th ough the teachers do their best. An increase in the number of pupils, and likely loss of outdoor space as a result of additional classrooms, would make this intolerable. I understand that the Council has proposed that this could be addressed by staggering play times. This would not be an adequate solution : it would make it even more difficult to schedule curricular and extra curricular sports lessons; and the noise in the playground would be very disruptive for lessons in the many classes next to the playground. I also understand there is a suggestion that the school could make more use of Blondin Park. Again, I would not regard this as an acceptable solution. It is a long walk and involves crossing a major road. The children would lose much valuablelearning or play time, and I suspect that the school would not be able to rely on willing parents to accompany the children as it does now. b) The main hall would not be able to accommodate gatherings involving the whole school. This would undermine the sense of community which is so important to a school. It would reduce the opportunities for the younger children to observe the older children whom they regard as role models. the noise of staggered assemblies would be very disruptive for lessons in the very many classrooms which open onto the main hall area. c) The lunch time would become even more extended than it is now. This is a particular concern to me, as the parent of a child with diabetes who needs to eat at regular intervals to avoid hypoglycaemia.
On this basis, I regard the proposed expansion as highly detrimental to the education of my children, and future generations of children attending the school.
I also object on the grounds of the transition. The noise would be disruptive. I also have concerns about the safety of the children especially in the area immediately around the school, as there is little room for heavy construction vehicles. Building work at Little Ealing is a very different prospect to the recent rebuilding of Grange, which could keep the children away from the works by virtue of its size, and had a means of bringing in lorries relatively safely. Again, I think it is difficult to regard the transition as anythingbut detrimental to the education of my children.
I appreciate that there is a real issue raised by the demographics of the area,and this is not going to go away. When I responded to the non-statutory consultation last summer, I did suggest that the Council build a new 2 or 3FE school in Blondin Park to relieve pressure on both Little Ealing and Fielding primary schools. The park is relatively little used. It could easily accommodate a school, and still leave plenty of public space; indeed, a school could help turn it from the rather bleak and inviting place it is now to a lively and vibrant amenity for the local community. The recent letter from the Council to parents said that there were ‘compelling reasons’ for not building on local parkland. I would be grateful if you could advise me of these reasons as I have not been able to find them on the Council’s website.
More generally, I believe very strongly that the Council needs to build more schools to accommodate the children who live in the central areas of Ealing including North, South and West Ealing at both primary and secondary level.
When looking a map of the borough, it is striking how few schools there are in this area compared with the rest of the borough. It feels as though we are having to scrabble for the crumbs after others have made their choices. Youseem to think we can all afford private school fees!
8. I would like to formally register my wife and I's strong objections to the proposed expansion of Little Ealing school.
My 3 children are currently at the school and I am a teacher myself - it is absolutely clear that the site is barely big enough to host 2 forms of entry, let alone the proposed three. There are many other valid reasons and arguments as to why this expansion is bad news for children in Ealing which I am sure you are by now familiar with. I am disturbed and worried about the implicit threats that the school will not be developed or progressed unless this expansion takes place - Blackmail!
9. I am simply astounded by the local authority¹s short sightedness regarding the expansion of Little Ealing Primary School. Your refusal to investigate other options regarding a building a new local school and lack of concern for current pupils and staff whilst the proposed expansion takes place is unacceptable. I understand that whilst the building work takes place there will be no outdoor space for our children to play or to have P.E lessons. For TWO years. This is an outrage. And I simply do not believe it would be possible to take 400 children to Blondin Park for such activities three times a day! Who would take them? I have been involved on school outings with just 60 children at a time and this is a ludicrous statement aside from the fact it would be extremely dangerous without proper supervision. As a parent of three children, two still remaining at Little Ealing, I understand the prospective parents concern for school places. However, I feel a better solution for all concerned would be to build a new school within the Little Ealing catchment .The local authority has known about this problem for over ten years and is now trying to shockingly cover up any lack of planning with this proposal. This problem will not go away. The local residents need a new school, build a NEW SCHOOL. And I would just like to add that Little Ealing school is named for a reason.
Alternative proposals that I would like you to consider; BUILD A SCHOOL IN BLONDIN PARK AND MAKE LITTLE EALING A PARK
This could also apply to a site in Lamas Park next to Culmington Road or Walpole Park Near Matock Lane
I propose that a new three form entry school be built in Blondin Park and that the current Site of Little Ealing School be made into a park including a five aside football pitch, play area and gardens. Some small amount of suitable building could also be left for community use.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are :
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. The new school would be wholly new and be cheaper to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would back on to the train tracks and front onto the park. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site.
BUILD A SCHOOL IN GUNNERSBURY PARK
I propose that a new school be built in Gunnersbury Park. A new large school could easily fit into Gunnersbury park near to the junction of Popes Lane and Lionel Road without any significant loss of space in the park.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are :
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
10. The proposed expansion of Little Ealing Primary School will have a seriously detrimental effect on the education of children at the school. The site is too small. The expansion is thus clearly inconsistent with Government's healthy lifestyle policies. The lack of space problem cannot be adequately solved by schemes such as staggering play times and eating times. As I hope you are aware, well over half the classrooms in Little Ealing border the playground. The noise of constant playing outside their classroom as well as the associated bell ringing will make concentration for these small children impossible and their education will suffer hugely. Staggering eating times any more than is presently done will result in unhealthy eating patterns.
There is some land close to school which is hardly used - the West side of Blondin Park. There is plenty of space there and it is close to large parts of the Little Ealing catchment area. The council should build a new school there.
Ealing Council does not have the right to save money by providing a sub-standard level of education to its residents. It should build an adequate number of schools for the area even if this means raising council tax.
11. I have two children attending Little Ealing Primary School at the moment and I am very much against the council's proposal to expand this school. It's my belief that the Little Ealing site is way too small to accommodate over 600 children regardless of the building plans proposed.
I also believe that using the reason that Little Ealing is in demand and should therefore be expanded is disingenuous. Parents are forced to put their catchment school as their first preference when applying for a school because they have no almost no chance of getting into any school outside their catchment area hence the large number of people putting Little Ealing as their first choice.
The catchment area for Little Ealing is too large and has been for many years and yet the council has repeatedly refused to do anything about it. We have the ludicrous situation where children who live nearer to Grange and Fielding are sent to Little Ealing whereas parents who live south of Little Ealing have to walk past it to get to Grange.
The failure to do anything about catchment areas has also negatively affected Grange as parents who live in Little Ealing catchment who get forced to go to Grange have no choice but to move their child to Little Ealing when a place becomes available as this is the only way to guarantee their siblings will end up at the same school. The council has repeatedly refused to change the rules to give out of catchment siblings priority at Grange when children have been sent there because there was no space at Little Ealing. So parents who may be happy with Grange can't risk staying there in case their subsequent children won't get in.
All this distorts the demand for Little Ealing, which in any case, by the Council's own figures is falling.
On the question of expansion in general it's my belief that when you need 12 more forms of entry to meet demand then you should be looking at providing a new school, not trying to shoe-horn the children into existing schools. The amount being spent on expansion is enough to build one or more new schools. The idea that no green space can ever be converted to another use to benefit the community is nonsense. While I understand that changing the use of green space is not a decision to be taken lightly I also believe Ealing has ample sites where a new school could be accommodated to the benefit of everyone. Blondin Park and Gunnersbury park are two places where schools could be accommodated. There are also allottment sites which could be re-sited in order to make space for a school.
I do not believe that the Council has ever seriously considered providing a new school but I urge you to seriously start considering it now.
12. I wish to formally raise my objection to the plans to expand Little Ealing School. The site is simply not big enough and the safety and wellbeing of the children must be everyone’s primary concern.
Below are other options that should be being considered.
BUILD A SCHOOL IN BLONDIN PARK AND MAKE LITTLE EALING A PARK
This could also apply to a site in Lamas Park next to Culmington Road or Walpole Park Near Matock Lane
I propose that a new three form entry school be built in Blondin Park and that the current Site of Little Ealing School be made into a park including a five aside football pitch, play area and gardens. Some small amount of suitable building could also be left for community use.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are :
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. The new school would be wholly new and be cheaper to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would back on to the train tracks and front onto the park. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site.
BUILD A SCHOOL IN GUNNERSBURY PARK
I propose that a new school be built in Gunnersbury Park. A new large school could easily fit into Gunnersbury park near to the junction of Popes Lane and Lionel Road without any significant loss of space in the park.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are :
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
BUILD A SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS AT BLONDIN PARK
Building a school on the allotments would be allowed if the allotments were relocated. The allotments could be relocated to the site near Almond Avenue that was apparently considered for a new school but was rejected before the consultation.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are :
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. The new school would be wholly new and be cheaper to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would back on to the train tracks and front onto the park. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
BUILD A NEW SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS NEAR RANELAGH ROAD
This plan is similar to ‘BUILD A SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS AT BLONDIN PARK’
LEASE/SHARE FACILITIES AT KING FAHAD ACADEMY
The council stated that the negotiations with the owners of the King Fahad Academy building consisted of “Do you want to sell the property”, “No”. It is quite obvious that the Saudi government will not want to simply sell a piece of prime real estate in this economic climate and it is also apparent that the council need to be more creative in their approach to possibilities.
The site is only currently used at the weekends. There is the possibility of sharing the facilities. There is also another building on the site which is derelict and dates from the 50’s or 60’s. This building is not used at all. The leasing of this building should be investigated.
BUILD A NEW SCHOOL IN THE INDUSTRIAL AREA IN WINDMILL ROAD
The industrial area in Windmill Road currently houses a number of businesses. Two adjacent may be available. The first is already empty and the second is current the BBC archives which are due to close soon.
The new school would be wholly new and be cheap to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would be away from residences. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
13. Certainly worth reviewing other options seeing as there are so many out there for you to take.
I'm very much against the expansion and the impact it'll have on my two children who are currently studying at Little Ealing School.
I live on Weymouth Avenue and apart from all the reasons for disputing the expansion, I am concerned about the increase in vehicles on the road during school drop offs and pick ups. The area is already very congested. This puts children and parents safety at risk as well as bringing residents additional hassle.
I do Question how much thought has actually gone into this project.
14. It is beyond my comprehension that you are planning to increase the capacity of Little Ealing Primary School by 50%.
I protest since the site is far too small and for health and safety issues.
I also protest that the culture of the school will change.
I protest against the potential 18 months of construction which will be detrimental to my children’s education.
I protest against the increase in congestion which is already at a dangerous level.
I protest at the proposed staggered playtimes and assemblies which are a crucial part of the culture of this school.
I protest outright.
The governors are against this, the staff are against this and the majority of parents are against this. As a democratically elected member of our council, you must listen to our views and opinions.
I believe that the correct solution will be to build a new primary school, leaving Little Ealing as it currently is. This will solve the problem of a shortage of spaces and will present more parental choice in choosing a school; this can only help to improve standards. My suggestions are as follows:
Build a school in Blondin Park I propose that a new three form entry school be built in Blondin Park.
Advantages: The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. The new school would be wholly new and be cheaper to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would back on to the train tracks and front onto the park. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site.
Build a school in Gunnersbury Park I propose that a new school be built in Gunnersbury Park. There is already talk of a housing development but surely a school is more important. A new large school could easily fit into Gunnersbury park near to the junction of Popes Lane and Lionel Road without any significant loss of space in the park.
Advantages: The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
Build a new school on the allotments at Blondin Park Building a school on the allotments would be allowed if the allotments were relocated. The allotments could be relocated to the site near Almond Avenue that was apparently considered for a new school but was rejected before the consultation.
Advantages: The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. The new school would be wholly new and be cheaper to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would back on to the train tracks and front onto the park. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
Build a new school on the allotments near Ranelagh Road See above for advantages
Lease/Share or swap facilities at King Fahad Academy The council stated that the negotiations with the owners of the King Fahad Academy building consisted of “Do you want to sell the property”, “No”. It is quite obvious that the Saudi government will not want to simply sell a piece of prime real estate in this economic climate and it is also apparent that the council need to be more creative in their approach to possibilities.
The site is only currently used at the weekends. There is the possibility of sharing the facilities. There is also another building on the site which is derelict and dates from the 50’s or 60’s. This building is not used at all. The leasing of this building should be investigated.
Build a new school in the industrial area in WIndmill Road The industrial area in Windmill Road currently houses a number of businesses. Two adjacent may be available. The first is already empty and the second is current the BBC archives which are due to close soon.
The new school would be wholly new and be cheap to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would be away from residences. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents
I am aware that there is a crisis of shortage of places in this borough but I strongly disagree with expanding current schools. Therefore I implore you to listen to the mass of objections you are receiving and the suggestions contained with in them to find an amicable solution.
15. BUILD A SCHOOL IN BLONDIN PARK AND MAKE LITTLE EALING A PARKThis could also apply to a site in Lamas Park next to Culmington Road or Walpole Park Near Matock LaneI propose that a new three form entry school be built in Blondin Park and that the current Site of Little Ealing School be made into a park including a five aside football pitch, play area and gardens. Some small amount of suitable building could also be left for community use.Advantages over the current expansion plan are :The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community.The new school would be wholly new and be cheaper to maintain.The new school could be built higher as it would back on to the train tracks and front onto the park.There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn.It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel.The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site.
16. It is beyond my comprehension that you are planning to increase the capacity of Little Ealing Primary School by 50%.
I protest since the site is far too small and for health and safety issues.
I also protest that the culture of the school will change.
I protest against the potential 18 months of construction which will be detrimental to my children's education.
I protest against the increase in congestion which is already at a dangerous level.
I protest at the proposed staggered playtimes and assemblies which are a crucial part of the culture of this school.
I protest outright.
The governors are against this, the staff are against this and the majority of parents are against this. As a democratically elected member of our council, you must listen to our views and opinions.
I believe that the correct solution will be to build a new primary school, leaving Little Ealing as it currently is. This will solve the problem of a shortage of spaces and will present more parental choice in choosing a school; this can only help to improve standards. My suggestions are as follows:
Build a school in Blondin Park I propose that a new three form entry school be built in Blondin Park.
Advantages: The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. The new school would be wholly new and be cheaper to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would back on to the train tracks and front onto the park. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site.
Build a school in Gunnersbury Park I propose that a new school be built in Gunnersbury Park. There is already talk of a housing development but surely a school is more important. A new large school could easily fit into Gunnersbury park near to the junction of Popes Lane and Lionel Road without any significant loss of space in the park.
Advantages: The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
Build a new school on the allotments at Blondin Park Building a school on the allotments would be allowed if the allotments were relocated. The allotments could be relocated to the site near Almond Avenue that was apparently considered for a new school but was rejected before the consultation.
Advantages: The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. The new school would be wholly new and be cheaper to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would back on to the train tracks and front onto the park. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
Build a new school on the allotments near Ranelagh Road See above for advantages
Lease/Share or swap facilities at King Fahad Academy The council stated that the negotiations with the owners of the King Fahad Academy building consisted of "Do you want to sell the property", "No". It is quite obvious that the Saudi government will not want to simply sell a piece of prime real estate in this economic climate and it is also apparent that the council need to be more creative in their approach to possibilities.
The site is only currently used at the weekends. There is the possibility of sharing the facilities. There is also another building on the site which is derelict and dates from the 50's or 60's. This building is not used at all. The leasing of this building should be investigated.
Build a new school in the industrial area in WIndmill Road The industrial area in Windmill Road currently houses a number of businesses. Two adjacent may be available. The first is already empty and the second is current the BBC archives which are due to close soon.
The new school would be wholly new and be cheap to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would be away from residences. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents
I am aware that there is a crisis of shortage of places in this borough but I strongly disagree with expanding current schools. Therefore I implore you to listen to the mass of objections you are receiving and the suggestions contained with in them to find an amicable solution.
17. I agree totally with the following:
The expansion of the school as proposed is the easy option for the council. They have not properly looked at alternatives and are resorting to enlargement of an existing school because it's something that they have done before. The LA has to provide more school places soon and they are telling us that we are selfish if we object to expansion because the future school children have nowhere else to go. They need to build them somewhere else to go. The council have seen the trend towards lack of capacity for several years and now they want to cover up their lack of action by placing the burden on our school.
There are the following options:
BUILD A SCHOOL IN GUNNERSBURY PARK
A new large school could easily fit into Gunnersbury park near to the junction of Popes Lane and Lionel Road without any significant loss of space in the park.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are :
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
BUILD A SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS AT BLONDIN PARK
Building a school on the allotments would be allowed if the allotments were relocated. The allotments could be relocated to the site near Almond Avenue that was apparently considered for a new school but was rejected before the consultation.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are :
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. The new school would be wholly new and be cheaper to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would back on to the train tracks and front onto the park. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
BUILD A NEW SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS NEAR RANELAGH ROAD
This plan is similar to 'BUILD A SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS AT BLONDIN PARK'
LEASE/SHARE FACILITIES AT KING FAHAD ACADEMY
The council stated that the negotiations with the owners of the King Fahad Academy building consisted of "Do you want to sell the property", "No". It is quite obvious that the Saudi government will not want to simply sell a piece of prime real estate in this economic climate and it is also apparent that the council need to be more creative in their approach to possibilities.
The site is only currently used at the weekends. There is the possibility of sharing the facilities. There is also another building on the site which is derelict and dates from the 50's or 60's. This building is not used at all. The leasing of this building should be investigated.
BUILD A NEW SCHOOL IN THE INDUSTRIAL AREA IN WINDMILL ROAD
The industrial area in Windmill Road currently houses a number of businesses. Two adjacent may be available. The first is already empty and the second is current the BBC archives which are due to close soon.
The new school would be wholly new and be cheap to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would be away from residences. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
18. BUILD A SCHOOL IN BLONDIN PARK AND MAKE LITTLE EALING A PARK
This could also apply to a site in Lamas Park next to Culmington Road or Walpole Park Near Matock Lane
I propose that a new three form entry school be built in Blondin Park and that the current Site of Little Ealing School be made into a park including a five aside football pitch, play area and gardens. Some small amount of suitable building could also be left for community use.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are :
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. The new school would be wholly new and be cheaper to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would back on to the train tracks and front onto the park. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site.
BUILD A SCHOOL IN GUNNERSBURY PARK
I propose that a new school be built in Gunnersbury Park. A new large school could easily fit into Gunnersbury park near to the junction of Popes Lane and Lionel Road without any significant loss of space in the park.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are :
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
BUILD A SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS AT BLONDIN PARK
Building a school on the allotments would be allowed if the allotments were relocated. The allotments could be relocated to the site near Almond Avenue that was apparently considered for a new school but was rejected before the consultation.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are :
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. The new school would be wholly new and be cheaper to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would back on to the train tracks and front onto the park. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
BUILD A NEW SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS NEAR RANELAGH ROAD
This plan is similar to ‘BUILD A SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS AT BLONDIN PARK’
LEASE/SHARE FACILITIES AT KING FAHAD ACADEMY
The council stated that the negotiations with the owners of the King Fahad Academy building consisted of “Do you want to sell the property”, “No”. It is quite obvious that the Saudi government will not want to simply sell a piece of prime real estate in this economic climate and it is also apparent that the council need to be more creative in their approach to possibilities.
The site is only currently used at the weekends. There is the possibility of sharing the facilities. There is also another building on the site which is derelict and dates from the 50’s or 60’s. This building is not used at all. The leasing of this building should be investigated.
BUILD A NEW SCHOOL IN THE INDUSTRIAL AREA IN WINDMILL ROAD
The industrial area in Windmill Road currently houses a number of businesses. Two adjacent may be available. The first is already empty and the second is current the BBC archives which are due to close soon.
The new school would be wholly new and be cheap to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would be away from residences. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
Please don't ruin the wonderful learning environment at Little Ealing School, with a cheap fix.
19. Whilst I write in the angry belief that the decision has already been taken regarding the proposal to expand the school and that it is indeed a "fait accomplit", I would ask for confirmation that all the options below have been thoroughly investigated.
1. BUILD A SCHOOL IN BLONDIN PARK AND MAKE LITTLE EALING A PARK
This could also apply to a site in Lamas Park next to Culmington Road or Walpole Park Near Matock Lane
I propose that a new three form entry school be built in Blondin Park and that the current Site of Little Ealing School be made into a park including a five aside football pitch, play area and gardens. Some small amount of suitable building could also be left for community use.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are :
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. The new school would be wholly new and be cheaper to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would back on to the train tracks and front onto the park. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site.
2. BUILD A SCHOOL IN GUNNERSBURY PARK
I propose that a new school be built in Gunnersbury Park. A new large school could easily fit into Gunnersbury park near to the junction of Popes Lane and Lionel Road without any significant loss of space in the park.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are :
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
3. LEASE/SHARE FACILITIES AT KING FAHAD ACADEMY
The council stated that the negotiations with the owners of the King Fahad Academy building consisted of "Do you want to sell the property", "No". It is quite obvious that the Saudi government will not want to simply sell a piece of prime real estate in this economic climate and it is also apparent that the council need to be more creative in their approach to possibilities.
The site is only currently used at the weekends. There is the possibility of sharing the facilities. There is also another building on the site which is derelict and dates from the 50's or 60's. This building is not used at all. The leasing of this building should be investigated.
4. BUILD A NEW SCHOOL IN THE INDUSTRIAL AREA IN WINDMILL ROAD
The industrial area in Windmill Road currently houses a number of businesses. Two adjacent may be available. The first is already empty and the second is current the BBC archives which are due to close soon.
The new school would be wholly new and be cheap to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would be away from residences. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
5. REDEFINEMENT OF CATCHMENT AREA
Whilst at the meeting you said this would be opening up a can of worms surely this could be looked at and redefined slowly over a number of years?
The increases proposed across the borough seem to be a total crisis management decision. Whilst some schools do have the space and physically can expand and whilst it is possible to build up at Little Ealing it is so obvious that one or more new schools are needed for the borough. And what is the impact on the secondary schools going to be when they are also at bursting point? Where will all the primary children go on to? Children in the South Ealing and surrounding neighbourhood catchment already have very little choice or possibilities. Why was the recent Grange re-build only designed as a 2 form entry? Did you not have the growth data availabe then? Is it not just short-sightedness? It is quite unbelieveable - particularly given the amount of land available there. Their building work was done mainly during the summer holidays - not the case for Little Ealing - a two year programme of building works with no access site, huge congestion and upheaval for local residents in an already congested zone at peak school times.
If the school expansion does go ahead with all of the difficulties and disruptions to learning that will inevitably ensue during the building programme, not to mention the restricted outside space facilities, are you going to tender for business and get different proposals for the design put forward or are the plans that were brought along to the meeting the other week the definitive ones as it would appear that there are health and safety issues in the existing proposal with regard to the location of the proposed new kitchens.
Would you consider not charging schools for the use of Blondin Park? Some of the Council's ludicrous rules and regulations would surely be reviewed in these circumstances? If this is not the case it will be harder still to accept this as a true consultation. In order for the Council to regain some credibility and regain the trust of the parents for whatever plans are finally decided it would be refreshing if the Council could see its way to being up front and honest by respecting the parental representation. The lack of respect is insulting to our intelligence. We need some genuine reassurance and answers please.
I look forward to hearing from you.
20. BUILD A SCHOOL IN BLONDIN PARK AND MAKE LITTLE EALING A PARK
This could also apply to a site in Lamas Park next to Culmington Road or Walpole Park Near Matock Lane
I propose that a new three form entry school be built in Blondin Park and that the current Site of Little Ealing School be made into a park including a five aside football pitch, play area and gardens. Some small amount of suitable building could also be left for community use.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are :
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. The new school would be wholly new and be cheaper to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would back on to the train tracks and front onto the park. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site.
BUILD A SCHOOL IN GUNNERSBURY PARK
I propose that a new school be built in Gunnersbury Park. A new large school could easily fit into Gunnersbury park near to the junction of Popes Lane and Lionel Road without any significant loss of space in the park.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are :
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
BUILD A SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS AT BLONDIN PARK
Building a school on the allotments would be allowed if the allotments were relocated. The allotments could be relocated to the site near Almond Avenue that was apparently considered for a new school but was rejected before the consultation.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are :
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. The new school would be wholly new and be cheaper to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would back on to the train tracks and front onto the park. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
BUILD A NEW SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS NEAR RANELAGH ROAD
This plan is similar to ‘BUILD A SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS AT BLONDIN PARK’
LEASE/SHARE FACILITIES AT KING FAHAD ACADEMY
The council stated that the negotiations with the owners of the King Fahad Academy building consisted of “Do you want to sell the property”, “No”. It is quite obvious that the Saudi government will not want to simply sell a piece of prime real estate in this economic climate and it is also apparent that the council need to be more creative in their approach to possibilities.
The site is only currently used at the weekends. There is the possibility of sharing the facilities. There is also another building on the site which is derelict and dates from the 50’s or 60’s. This building is not used at all. The leasing of this building should be investigated.
BUILD A NEW SCHOOL IN THE INDUSTRIAL AREA IN WINDMILL ROAD
The industrial area in Windmill Road currently houses a number of businesses. Two adjacent may be available. The first is already empty and the second is current the BBC archives which are due to close soon.
The new school would be wholly new and be cheap to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would be away from residences. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
21. I am writing to protest about your proposed expansion of Little Ealing School. I believe that making this a 3 form entry school could be detrimental to the children, who are at the end of the day what schools are about!!
The playground is not big enough to accommodate an extra 210 children. It is currently a cramped space and this could make playtimes dangerous as well as intimidating for younger children. PE is a vital aspect of the children's curriculum, increasingly so with the drive for healthy schools. It will make PE slots very limited to enable all 21 classes to go outside to use the space.
I believe the suggested plans has the dining room as an extension of the school hall, which can be opened up to accommodate whole school assemblies. There is nothing worse than teaching a PE lesson/having an assembly where the children have to step/sit in post lunch mess. I also find it difficult to imagine a whole school assembly with 630 children. Can you imagine how long it will take to file all these children in and out? What a waste of their learning time and I strongly believe that whole school assemblies are a necessity in building the ethos of the school. Little Ealing currently has a very strong and nurturing ethos and I'm afraid that this would disappear.
I do understand why parents who's children don't attend the school would want their children as part of this community but I don't think they realise the changes that would happen to Little Ealing would change its strengths completely making much less appealing.
I believe the solution to this problem is building a new school on appropriate land, be it Blondin park or Lammas Park. I myself am a teacher who's school has just been rebuilt in a brand new building, the facilities are amazing and the children delight in their environment. These sorts of facilities could be offered to the residents of South Ealing and will really benefit and enhance our already excellent schools in Ealing.
I hope you reconsider your plans about the expansion of Little Ealing for the sake of all the children be they currently in the school or hoping to get in.
22. I object to the three form intake on Health and Safety grounds. I am a crisis management professional and I would never accept that amount of children in a small area like Little Ealing school. Have the school ever done an emergency evacuation? With more children an evacuation would not work and we would have injured (at best) or dead (at worst) children to deal with.
I suggest:
BUILD A SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS AT BLONDIN PARK
Building a school on the allotments would be allowed if the allotments were relocated. The allotments could be relocated to the site near Almond Avenue that was apparently considered for a new school but was rejected before the consultation.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are :
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. The new school would be wholly new and be cheaper to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would back on to the train tracks and front onto the park. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
BUILD A NEW SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS NEAR RANELAGH ROAD
This plan is similar to ‘BUILD A SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS AT BLONDIN PARK’
LEASE/SHARE FACILITIES AT KING FAHAD ACADEMY
The council stated that the negotiations with the owners of the King Fahad Academy building consisted of “Do you want to sell the property”, “No”. It is quite obvious that the Saudi government will not want to simply sell a piece of prime real estate in this economic climate and it is also apparent that the council need to be more creative in their approach to possibilities.
The site is only currently used at the weekends. There is the possibility of sharing the facilities. There is also another building on the site which is derelict and dates from the 50’s or 60’s. This building is not used at all. The leasing of this building should be investigated.
BUILD A NEW SCHOOL IN THE INDUSTRIAL AREA IN WINDMILL ROAD
The industrial area in Windmill Road currently houses a number of businesses. Two adjacent may be available. The first is already empty and the second is current the BBC archives which are due to close soon.
The new school would be wholly new and be cheap to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would be away from residences. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
23. As parents of one child who attends LEPS (and another one who will be attending in the near future), we would like to register our objection against Ealing Council's proposed expansion plans.
Our objections to an expansion proposal on the same LEPS plot of land is outlined in brief below: -
1. This expansion is not in the interests of our children; 2. Overcrowding will result in stress for the children, teachers and parents, which will impact in a negative way the performance of this school; 3. Noise levels will increase dramatically, further increasing stress on children, teachers and local residents; 4. The ethos of the school will be adversely affected; 5. Intolerable levels of traffic congestion; 6. Staggered playtimes and assemblies are simply not acceptable; 7. No alternatives of any significance have been investigated by Ealing Council; 8. 18 to 24 months of major construction work will have a severe impact on our children's education;
24. I am writing to express my dismay at your choice of school for expansion to three forms. LEPS is a thriving, well sized school with barely enough space to contain its current student quota and all their indoor and outdoor activities. It has an ethos that makes it a highly desirable school for local parents and it is understandable that there is pressure on places here. As it is it is a quart squeezed into a pint pot, and the thought of not only the proximity of noise during building works to the whole school but also the loss of space that extension would demand is only going to worsen the situation.
The school is very inclusive and demands the respect of its pupils at all ages. One of the ways it achieves this is by bringing the school together frequently, with all pupils (plus visiting parents) in the assembly hall together. This will not be possible in the same way with such an increase in roll.
There is crowding and congestion around the school as it is. Are you able to assure us of the safety of our children when the volume increases by a third? More cars can only mean more frustration and more potential danger to the children.
The changes you are planning to make are so permanent. How sure are you that the demographic changes are as permanent?
Our children are already crowded in so many ways,even in this relatively green borough. It truly saddens me to think that they will once again be crimped and compromised by a council decision that to so many of us seems rushed and poorly planned. I understand that hard decisions need to be made, but can't we make one that is more positive for the borough and build the facilities that these future taxpayers deserve, rather than what you can (and you can) force on them? There does not seem to be any considered alternative strategy to expansion of existing schools, which seems to show a lack of maturity in the planning process. What has made the council exclude a new build? It would also be a tough decision, but likely to be more highly valued by the residents than this seeming hotch potch. What of the possibility of building in Blondin Park/Lammas Park/Walpole Park/Blondin allottments?
I strongly object to your proposal to the formation of three form intake at LEPS. I encourage the council to think beyond the obvious expansion proposal and do something truly beneficial for our children and future children.
25. Please find below alternative ideas to expanding Little Ealing School.
*BUILD A SCHOOL IN BLONDIN PARK AND MAKE LITTLE EALING A PARK
*This could also apply to a site in Lamas Park next to Culmington Road or Walpole Park Near Matock Lane
I propose that a new three form entry school be built in Blondin Park and that the current Site of Little Ealing School be made into a park including a five aside football pitch, play area and gardens. Some small amount of suitable building could also be left for community use.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are :
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. The new school would be wholly new and be cheaper to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would back on to the train tracks and front onto the park. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site.
*BUILD A SCHOOL IN GUNNERSBURY PARK * I propose that a new school be built in Gunnersbury Park. A new large school could easily fit into Gunnersbury park near to the junction of Popes Lane and Lionel Road without any significant loss of space in the park.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are :
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
*BUILD A SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS AT BLONDIN PARK*
Building a school on the allotments would be allowed if the allotments were relocated. The allotments could be relocated to the site near Almond Avenue that was apparently considered for a new school but was rejected before the consultation.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are :
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. The new school would be wholly new and be cheaper to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would back on to the train tracks and front onto the park. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
*BUILD A NEW SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS NEAR RANELAGH ROAD*
This plan is similar to 'BUILD A SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS AT BLONDIN PARK'
*LEASE/SHARE FACILITIES AT KING FAHAD ACADEMY*
The council stated that the negotiations with the owners of the King Fahad Academy building consisted of "Do you want to sell the property", "No". It is quite obvious that the Saudi government will not want to simply sell a piece of prime real estate in this economic climate and it is also apparent that the council need to be more creative in their approach to possibilities.
The site is only currently used at the weekends. There is the possibility of sharing the facilities. There is also another building on the site which is derelict and dates from the 50's or 60's. This building is not used at all. The leasing of this building should be investigated.
*BUILD A NEW SCHOOL IN THE INDUSTRIAL AREA IN WINDMILL ROAD*
The industrial area in Windmill Road currently houses a number of businesses. Two adjacent may be available. The first is already empty and the second is current the BBC archives which are due to close soon.
The new school would be wholly new and be cheap to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would be away from residences. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
26. It is my opinion that the expansion of the school is proposed as the easy option for the council. I think that they have not properly looked at alternatives and are resorting to enlargement of an existing school because it’s something that they have done before. The LA has to provide more school places soon and they are telling us that we are selfish if we object to expansion because the future school children have nowhere else to go. My answer is, build them somewhere else to go. The council have seen the trend towards lack of capacity for several years and now they want to cover up their lack of action by placing the burden on our school.
27. I would like to join the others who have been contacting you in order to voice their opinion on the expansion of Little Ealing School. I did attend the meeting at the school the other night, and I left feeling there was little point in voicing any opinion as the decision had already been made. However, I live in hope that there is some sort of legal requirement for consultation with existing parents at Little Ealing School, so I will add my two cents.
I not only have children currently attending Little Ealing but another who will be going in 2010, and so will be directly affected by these plans. I know the school and how it works, I know what makes it a good school and what its drawbacks are. At the moment, the proposed plans, however good they may be, will not improve the school, and will only detract from what is a great little community school. Yesterday on the way to school I wish you could have seen the traffic jam outside the gates as children and parents tried to get in on foot. No one has talked about the impact of 250 more children (AND parents!) as they flood into school each day. There are children AT RISK of getting run over every morning. Making the school bigger right the way through will mean inevitably that children will be coming in from farther away, and trust me, more will be driving. There will be children AT RISK in the playground which will be woefully overcrowded. Everything that makes LE a great school: an art room, a music room, a French room, the 'extras' that our school find important are to be taken away. The council representative said to this that it is the headteacher and teachers that make it a good school. Well, yes, but why do you think they want to work there? LE has been able to attract good teachers because of its ethos, its atmosphere, its children and its active parents. Little Ealing is successful and that is the SOLE reason you want to expand it. It is ludicrous when you look at the size of the playground, hemmed in on all sides by roads and houses. A bigger school, fine, a better school, great.... but why can't you just build a new one? This CAN be looked into further, but you are scrambling for a solution right away. Why no one looked at birth trends and retention rates when they were rebuilding Grange (LAST YEAR!) I will never understand. So those are my feelings, and the feelings of countless other parents. Do what you like with them.
28. As a parent of one of the pupils, I object to Little Ealing school expansion on the following grounds:
I consider the changes are not in the best interests of my son, and I'm convinced that the prolonged period of construction at the school will be detrimental to his education. I believe that the changes will adversely affect the ethos of the school. It is also very likely that a number of teachers opposing the expansion will leave as a result. This in turn will lead to lower teaching quality and lack of continuity. I'm also concerned about fire, health and safety hazards, the poor air quality and lack of space during the construction period. The congestion in the local area will be intolerable, especially if Mount Carmel also expand as is being considered. The plan does not guarantee that the problem of parents taking their children past Little Ealing to Grange will be solved.
29. Why are you planning to expand a perfectly good school that won’t fix your problem when you can build a new one?
BUILD A SCHOOL IN BLONDIN PARK AND MAKE LITTLE EALING A PARK
This could also apply to a site in Lamas Park next to Culmington Road or Walpole Park Near Matock Lane
I propose that a new three form entry school be built in Blondin Park and that the current Site of Little Ealing School be made into a park including a five aside football pitch, play area and gardens. Some small amount of suitable building could also be left for community use.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are :
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. The new school would be wholly new and be cheaper to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would back on to the train tracks and front onto the park. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site.
BUILD A SCHOOL IN GUNNERSBURY PARK
I propose that a new school be built in Gunnersbury Park. A new large school could easily fit into Gunnersbury park near to the junction of Popes Lane and Lionel Road without any significant loss of space in the park.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are :
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
BUILD A SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS AT BLONDIN PARK
Building a school on the allotments would be allowed if the allotments were relocated. The allotments could be relocated to the site near Almond Avenue that was apparently considered for a new school but was rejected before the consultation.
Advantages over the current expansion plan are :
The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community. The new school would be wholly new and be cheaper to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would back on to the train tracks and front onto the park. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
BUILD A NEW SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS NEAR RANELAGH ROAD
This plan is similar to ‘BUILD A SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS AT BLONDIN PARK’
LEASE/SHARE FACILITIES AT KING FAHAD ACADEMY
The council stated that the negotiations with the owners of the King Fahad Academy building consisted of “Do you want to sell the property”, “No”. It is quite obvious that the Saudi government will not want to simply sell a piece of prime real estate in this economic climate and it is also apparent that the council need to be more creative in their approach to possibilities.
The site is only currently used at the weekends. There is the possibility of sharing the facilities. There is also another building on the site which is derelict and dates from the 50’s or 60’s. This building is not used at all. The leasing of this building should be investigated.
BUILD A NEW SCHOOL IN THE INDUSTRIAL AREA IN WINDMILL ROAD
The industrial area in Windmill Road currently houses a number of businesses. Two adjacent may be available. The first is already empty and the second is current the BBC archives which are due to close soon.
The new school would be wholly new and be cheap to maintain. The new school could be built higher as it would be away from residences. There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn. It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel. The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site. A new school would provide real choice for parents.
These are things that could and should be considered first before your decide to expand any of the other schools.
Don’t take the easy options because you can’t be bothered to make an effort.
I strongly oppose the expansion of Little Ealing Primary school. For the following reasons:
1. 1. The site is too small to accommodate a further 180 pupils. 2. 2. Increasing the lunch break from 2 to 3 is counter productive, to expect children to wait for their lunch is distracting for their education after all that is what they are there for. Not to mention the noise from the other children playing while others are supposed to be learning. 3. 3. The area is congested already with parents and children picking up and dropping off without adding more children do you have any idea how congested the area is during these times with 2 schools side by side? 4. 4. The site will be a building site for 2 years while you do all of these supposed improvements. Would you expect your child to learn in these conditions? 5. 5. If you do have PE in others spaces how much time will be wasted walking to the park and why should children be expected to do that anyway?
It isn’t our responsibility to provide education for our children it’s yours. Instead of ruining a school just build a new one.
30. I’d like to submit a cautious thumbs-up for the expansion at Little Ealing. I do think it would have been better to consider this some years ago and to build a number of new schools / expand schools with footprint space. However, I understand that this is not now feasible and my support is based on the hope that:
1. Building works are carried out as much as possible in the school holidays and that as many additional hours are worked during this period as possible – i.e. not 9 to 5!! 2. The Council works with the governors, school, parents to devise the plans. 3. PLEASE communicate well – particularly on matters of timing – this has been lacking until now.
As my son is due to start reception in September 2009, I am rather at a loss at to the outcome of a request to take a bulge class at Little Ealing school this September. Nobody seems to be able to confirm whether or not this is happening – rather disconcerting given that it is not far away. Furthermore, you do not show this in your tables etc. Please assist me in this.
31. BUILD A SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS AT BLONDIN PARKBuilding a school on the allotments would be allowed if the allotments were relocated. The allotments could be relocated to the site near Almond Avenue that was apparently considered for a new school but was rejected before the consultation.Advantages over the current expansion plan are :The new school would have easy access to open space used both by the school and at weekends by the general community.The new school would be wholly new and be cheaper to maintain.The new school could be built higher as it would back on to the train tracks and front onto the park.There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn.It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel.The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site.A new school would provide real choice for parents.BUILD A NEW SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS NEAR RANELAGH ROADThis plan is similar to ‘BUILD A SCHOOL ON THE ALLOTMENTS AT BLONDIN PARK’LEASE/SHARE FACILITIES AT KING FAHAD ACADEMYThe council stated that the negotiations with the owners of the King Fahad Academy building consisted of “Do you want to sell the property”, “No”. It is quite obvious that the Saudi government will not want to simply sell a piece of prime real estate in this economic climate and it is also apparent that the council need to be more creative in their approach to possibilities. The site is only currently used at the weekends. There is the possibility of sharing the facilities. There is also another building on the site which is derelict and dates from the 50’s or 60’s. This building is not used at all. The leasing of this building should be investigated.BUILD A NEW SCHOOL IN THE INDUSTRIAL AREA IN WINDMILL ROADThe industrial area in Windmill Road currently houses a number of businesses. Two adjacent may be available. The first is already empty and the second is current the BBC archives which are due to close soon.The new school would be wholly new and be cheap to maintain.The new school could be built higher as it would be away from residences.There would be no building work carried out on a site with children trying to learn.It would separate the congestion caused by Little Ealing and Mount Carmel.The building work would be faster without the constraints of a small site.A new school would provide real choice for parents.
32. Our main issues at that time were:
We were against the proposal Why can't the LBE change the catchment areas to be more in line with the population demands for schools. Area to south of LEPS especially. Why didn't they increase Grange when they could. Your statistics seem to show that you were aware of the impending demand for places, why not expand a school that has plenty of space? Why can't you use LBE land on Uxbridge Rd - schools will be needed once Arcadia redevelpoment and Dickens Yard are built.
Main issues are now:
• We are still against the expansion. • It appears it is going ahead despite the 88 parent votes against and the 179 other votes on the petition published on your website. (Not unlike the 3rd runway consultation.) • If it does proceed these are our concerns: • Site safety - reassurance especially as we will have 30 more pupils (then 60 the year after) on an even more congested site with porta cabins, construction site entrances etc. • Has any of the project team been to site during the 8.45am and 3.15pm pavement crush and the 12.00pm playground rush ? They should do, to really get a feel for the very congested site. • Time that Head has to deal with building issues needs to be really thought about. There should be a dedicated LBE appointed person to deal with the site. Not just one of the consultants or contract managers, but someone paid by LBE to ensure the Head's precious time is spent running the school not the building site. As I discussed with Cate Maybury on Tuesday 10th February at the school consultation, I have worked with building consultants who manage some of the building projects for LBE. I was once the person eating into the Head's precious time.
33. I would like to make some comments on the proposals to expand Little Ealing Primary School and increase the number of places available.
I am in favour of this proposal for the following reasons:
1. There is a clear need for additional primary school places in the borough due to rising birth rates, recent in-migration and the liklihood of increased retention rates as people are unable to move in the current economic climate.
2. Little Ealing, as a very popular school has been heavily over-subscribed in recent years, resulting in children who live within the catchment area and relatively close to the school not getting in. Parents make decisions about buying a house within the catchment area of a good school. If the borough continues to get a reputation for not being able to provide places for in- catchment children, families will not move to the borough to the detriment of community cohesion and the regeneration of Ealing.
3. I strongly believe that young children should be able to attend a local school, which they can walk to and where their school friends will live in close proximity creating a strong community.
4. In residential areas where the type of housing is predominantly family housing therefore attracting families with children, it is important to ensure there is sufficient provision of primary school places within those neighbourhoods, rather than forcing parents to travel outside their neighbourhood with young children.
Whilst there will need to be some clever planning and design to accommodate a three form entry school on the site of Little Ealing school, there are many good examples of multi-storey primary schools that operate well within urban areas.
I look forward to hearing the outcome of the proposals.
34. We are writing to raise our concerns at the planned expansion of Little Ealing School to allow a 3 year in-take. We have a son in year 2 and a daughter who would be eligible to apply for admission in 3 years. Your plans will therefore effect both of our children.
1) We think its been extremely disingenous of Ealing Council to imply that there was a genuine consultation about whether or not Little Ealing would have to comply with the school plans. Of course there are pressing and valid reasons why Ealing Council are seeking expansion but equally the school and parents may have equally valid reasons as to why the expansion may not be the best solution for the children currently at the school and prospective pupils. For any expansion plans to work in a way that doesn't just secure an increase in school places but actually results in a good education for the children involved you need the parents on board. The spirit in which Ealing Council had conducted this consultation undermines trust and consequently support.
2) We support the right of children from through out the catchment area to attend the school. We are deeply concerned and not persuaded about how the Council thinks the school will accommodate the play and sporting needs of the children given the restricted space on the school site.
3) If the expansion is going ahead, the Council needs to consult the school and parents on the building plans and timelines. We understand that the plans given to parents omit one of the extra class rooms needed and that the Council could withdraw the offer of specialist class rooms. Little Ealing is a desirable school because of the quality of education provided in a homely community setting. From what I have heard of the expansion plans I feel deeply uneasy about what this will mean in the short term as our children and teachers have to cope with building works- and in the long term if the Council provides us with shoddy, ill thought out and inadequate provision for our children.
Due to the above reasons we object to Ealing Council's plans for expansion of Little Ealing School. If you want the parents of Little ealing to support your plans we strongly recommend that you return to us in the spirit of genuine consultation and with building plans that the school and its children deserve.
35. We are writing in the strongest possible terms to object to the plan to increase the intake at Little Ealing Primary School.
Our son,….., is currently in the …… year at Little Ealing. Our older son, ……., also attended Little Ealing before going on to Drayton Manor High School. We have a very high opinion of LIttle Ealing as a primary school and we do not want to see this fine school damaged by trying to incorporate more children than it can sensibly accommodate.
In our view, this proposed change is very much against the interests of our child. At present the number of pupils is in our view the maximum that the premises can accommodate without causing disruption and added stress to the educational environment at Little Ealing. We believe that the proposals for staggered play times and assemblies will be damaging to the school's social cohesion and will adversely affect the ethos of the school. We understand that the Council has a problem meeting the primary school needs of all the children in the borough, but we do not believe that expansion of Little Ealing is an acceptable solution. We would like the council to properly explore alternatives - such as a new school on another site.
We have spoken to a large number of parents and staff at the school and there is an overwhelming majority who are against these plans. In addition, the Board of Governors of the school have made their objections clear. To force this change on all of us who will suffer the consequences is in our view completely unacceptable.
We live very close to the school in Hereford Road. At the start and end of the day, the traffic is already very heavy in the narrow streets that neighbour the school. An expansion of fifty per cent will mean intolerable congestion and traffic chaos every day.
In our view, this is an ill-conceived plan which will cause considerable damage to a fine school. We would like the Council to draw up a list of alternative proposals that will avoid the negative effects of this proposal. We are also particularly concerned about the inadequate public consultation process on this plan.
36.
I am a Little Ealing School parent with one child in Year …., and with another younger child hopefully entering reception in the near future.
No doubt the expansion of schools is proving controversial, the Council has some difficult decisions to make and not everyone can be satisfied.
My overall feeling is that attempting a 50% increase in pupil numbers at Little Ealing is a step too far. This is not a large school - no one can ever look at the play ground space for example and seriously say there is an abundance of or excessive space. There is enough space, but all schools should have enough space, and the proposed development will merely reduce that space and put additional pressure on the immediate neighbourhood. The proposals seem merely to discharge - on paper at least - Ealing Council's obligation to provide sufficent school places without really considering the detrimental effects of over-crowding. Sometimes cheapest really is worst. It's all very well having a presumption in favour of expanding popular schools but this should be applied with common sense and not blindly.
I believe the Council should consider the following: has there ever been a better time to consider building a new school? The projected pupil numbers suggest this is what is really required. Land is almost certainly at its cheapest in years, and builders are struggling to fill order books, never mind keep their employees employed. In more general terms, the Government seems keen to encourage what we might loosely call public works. Is this not a potentially great opportunity to furnish the borough with at least one proper new school?
I would urge the Council to seriously look again at the viability of acquiring land and starting from scratch, building a school that has spare capacity to absorb an increase in numbers that you may not yet realistically be able to compute. The current increase seems to have surprised many people - who is to say the trend will not continue or even escalate? A new school may well involve some imaginative practical thinking - shifting allotments, cooperating with neighbouring boroughs, redrawing school catchment boundaries to funnel new entrants more evenly. I have regularly heard references in this context to the need in certain cases of land use etc to obtain permission from the Secretary of State - as though this were some insurmountable obstacle.
37. I am objecting to the proposed expansion of Little Ealing Primary school for the following reasons:
I do not believe that expansion is in the interests of Little Ealing or of its pupils.
Little Ealing was built as a small Victorian school and has limited outside space all of which is tarmac. Expansion would mean less space for the children to run around and I believe will result in more accidents where children do not have enough space. This I do not believe can be solved by having staggered playtimes as the noise will be too disruptive for those children in classroom. This is turn will effect the children's learning and make the teachers job considerably harder.
Expansion of the school will make it too large and will I believe adversely effect its general feel and spirit.
I believe that the majority of the parents are against the expansion of the school and it certainly does nothing to increase parental choice
The noise of the building work will be hugely disruptive to the pupils and teachers. This again will make teaching hard which may lead to demotivation in the staff which may result in a fall in standards achieved by pupils. Children will find it incredibly difficult to concentrate in such a noisy environment.
Have the health and safety conditions been considered? Where will all the building materials be stored whilst the building work is undertaken, if it is in the playground that means even less space for pupils to let off steam? In addition lots of dusts will be very bad for asthmatics.
The school is located down a fairly narrow road upon which cars park on both sides, how will building contractors vehicles get access.
The disruption to local resident will be huge not just at the time that building work takes place but also afterwards. Many parents drive their children to school and the jams are ridiculous it will be an accident waiting to happen.
Where will staff park, there is limited space for the current staff as it is.
I do not believe that expansion of Little Ealing will solve the problem of parents having to walk past the school to take their children Grange.
I feel that Expansion of Little Ealing is an easy option and time should be taken thinking through best alternatives that serve long term objectives rather than going for a quick fix which will work maybe for a few years
Access to the school is tight already is this being resolved? In a fire it would be hard to evacuate the school quickly.
The governing body are against the proposal of expansion as are I believe the majority of school staff - this does not bode well for staff retention during construction!
This has not been properly thought through and at the public meeting there were many parents who were unable to express their views as the meeting was terminated very quickly. There must be another meeting so that there is a better understanding of all proposals.
38.
I would like to register the following objections to current plans for expansion to Little Ealing Primary School
I consider that the changes are not in the best interests of my children. 2. The changes will adversely affect the ethos of the school. 3. The enlargement of schools (as opposed to the building of a new school) does nothing to increase parental choice. 4. The 18 months of construction at the school will be detrimental to your child's education and potentially hazardous in terms of health and safety. 5. The council have not properly investigated alternative arrangements. 6. The congestion in the local area will be intolerable and more dangerous than it is now especially if Mount Carmel also expand as is being considered. 7. Staggered play times and assemblies are not acceptable. 8. The plan does not guarantee that the problem of parents taking their children past Little Ealing to Grange will be solved.
I have a major concern with health and safety of the build for the children both during and after any build on the site. I have seen no evidence of an independent health and safety report concerning the environment within and outside the school.
I cannot see that the proposals are correct in terms of providing the correct addition space.
There is a serious threat to the quality of provision of education if the plans go ahead and to the health and safety of our children.
39. I am writing to feedback my views on the now formal proposals to expand Little Ealing Primary School. I have commented at earlier consultations. Whilst I accept there is a need to provide more primary school places in the area and that the school may be capable of expansion, my real concern is that the Council is going to do this in the cheapest possible way without due regard to safeguarding the current facilities at the school. In particular I am concerned that:
1. The proposed plans displayed during the consultation do not demonstrate the retention of the 2 classrooms used for the specialist subjects of music and art. Not having the full facilities will impact on a key area of the teaching programme at Little Ealing and one which I believe greatly contributes to the special ethos the school has.
2. There appears to be no commitment that the funding is genuinely available to deliver a preferred option so I am concerned this is not really an open and honest consultation and that the decision will be based on what is the cheapest and easiest option for the Council rather than what is the best option for the school, the existing pupils and the additional intake from 2010. Unfortunately as I work more or less full time, inlcuding evening meetings I have not been able to attend many of the consultation events held about this. Why havn't you sent a questionnaire to all parents so that everyone has a fair and equal opportunity to express their views on the proposal - this is standard practice on other consultations about services in Ealing?
40.
I agree with the proposed enlargement subject to the following provisos:
1. The cabinet is convinced that all possible efforts have been made to find a suitable location for a new school. They are convinced that no new location is available. 2. A clear time table of the actions required is planned and made available for all, with plenty of time made available for consultation with the Head Teacher, Board of Governors, staff and the parents with regard to all aspects of the enlargement. 3. Special emphasis to be made on loss of play space. (Is it possible to use roofs, create a two tier play area?) Also traffic congestion and staff parking. (Is it possible for an underground car park?) 4. Off site facilities for team games and soft play be in place prior to any building works beginning.
I feel so far the London Borough of Ealing have been very poor in the handling of this matter. They have been very slow at revealing plans and information. I feel this has led to an increase in the pressure on the Head Teacher and the Board of Governors, who in turn are unable to keep parents properly informed. This is leaving a bad atmosphere in school which I put solely down to the council.
I believe if the London Borough of Ealing become more communicative and open, everybody will become better informed, with people starting to see the positives of the enlargement not just the negatives. This in turn will allow the whole project to run more smoothly to the benefit of everyone.
I look forward to your response.
41. I understand that you are the person to contact during the consultation process for the plans to increase Little Ealing's intake to 3 forms.
I am very familiar with the school, my eldest child attends, and my middle child is due to start ……. in September, and am very concerned about the imminent overcrowding being suggested.
The school's site is very small, and already, there is barely room in the main hall to have school assemblies with the current number of children; most of them have to sit cross-legged on the floor, with their feet pressed into the backs of the children in front of them, as there is not enough room to accommodate benches or chairs for all.
When we, as parents, attend our child's individual class assemblies, the situation is worsened. I find it impossible to envisage where more pupils could be accommodated. I understand that staggered assemblies have been suggested, which cannot be a serious suggestion given that the assembly hall is in the centre of the school, & surrounded by classrooms. The noise caused by such a plan would be disruptive to all classes adjoining the assembly hall.
The outside space available to the children is very limited and play times are already congested. I understand that lunchtimes already have to be staggered to fit the number of children into the canteen.
It would seem that the only way to accommodate more pupils would be to build more facilities on the already congested playground. This is wholly unacceptable. At the public meeting of 29th January 2009, it was suggested that the planned works to enlarge the school would take 18 months to 2 years. During this time the small amount of playground space available to the children would be severely curtailed both by the contractors, the demolition & the portacabins/temporary classrooms needed to house those children whose classrooms were being demolished. Moreover, I understand that the school is already increasing it's intake by having a burst year from Sept 2009. Thus there will be more children on the site whilst major works are carried out, & the already limited playground space will be severely reduced.
If it is decided to go ahead with an increase in intake, this should only be implemented after the building works have been completed.
Furthermore, the number of children already attending the school leads to congestion around the school at drop off and pick up times. The pavement in front of the school's main entrance is narrow, & frequently becomes blocked by the sheer number of people trying to walk to and from the school.
Also, there are no provisions, nor indeed room, for bicycle storage, which does little to encourage those who currently drive to school to leave their cars at home.
This is especially of concern to local residents who will see a further increase in the amount of traffic in the area, compounding parking problems & congestion. If Mount Carmel is to be made to expand too, this will compound the pre-existing problems of congestion. Staggered school times for Little Ealing would only add to the problem, as parents of siblings would remain on school grounds for longer, thereby increasing congestion.
I cannot envisage how the Council plans to fit another 210 children & their teachers into the site without expanding the plot, & its access, which is totally unfeasible as the plot is surrounded by private houses. Since the plot is not to be expanded, the plans shown to the parents so far have merely proved how little room there is. The current classrooms can barely hold the 30 children each. In some, it is impossible for all the children to sit in a circle, a fairly basic requirement of any classroom. The proposed plans shown to the parents are a classroom short, & specialist teaching areas have been decreased.
Overall I am extremely surprised and highly concerned that the Council felt it necessary to continue with this consultation in regards to Little Ealing. Anyone who is familiar with the site would wonder how the Council could possibly hope to address the issue of congestion should the increase in numbers go ahead.
Considering the increasing number of children in the borough, I find it astounding that the council is not constructing more schools to cope with the number of new property developments (e.g. Dickens Yard). The solution has to be to accommodate pupils in new schools, not to overcrowd & reduce standards of existing schools & their environment. As Ealing's population is still increasing, and space in existing schools being finite, the building of new schools is inevitable. It would be far more logical to plan for the future and build more large schools now, than to continue with piecemeal expansion as is being suggested now.
I firmly believe that the suggested expansion is not in the best interests of either my own children, nor any children who currently attend, or hope to attend, Little Ealing Primary School. The proposed expansion and resulting construction works will be detrimental to their education.
42. I am writing to express my opposition to the proposal to expand Little Ealing Primary School. I have two children at the school.
My opposition centres around the size and location of the school site and the implications expansion would have for the welfare and safety of the children already attending the school and, indeed, for future intakes.
First, the site is very small, particularly in terms of outside play space, and there is very little option to expand this. The site is landlocked. I have seen the proposed plans for the site but I was not convinced by these. They add very little in the way of play space, and during the proposed 18 months or so of building work it appears the amount of space would actually be reduced from its current level.
Second, there is already significant people and car congestion outside the school. This is made worse by the fact that the school is adjacent to Mount Carmel, which already doubles the number of children trying to get to school in a very confined area. The plans for a second entrance may help - but is there a cast-iron guarantee this entrance will get approval? If not, we could be left with a very dangerous situation, with even more children, siblings and parents coming and going through one already very overcrowded entrance/exit point.
The added traffic congestion in the area is also a serious issue for safety. Lots of people already drive their children to school, regardless of how close they live, and crossing the roads near the school is already hazardous. Thinking extra children won't mean extra cars is totally unrealistic.
I understand the need for additional school places but that doesn't mean that expanding Little Ealing is the answer. I agree with the views expressed by other parents that the expansion of the school is seen as an easy option for the council, and I question whether alternative solutions have been looked at thoroughly. I believe the council should consider/reconsider other options before proceeding with these expansion plans.
I hope the council will consider these opinions and will rethink its proposal to expand Little Ealing Primary School.
43. As a parent of a child at Little Ealing Primary School I am writing to object to the proposed expansion of Little Ealing to three form entry throughout the school.
Having attended the January 29th 2009 meeting at the school, I still feel that the school site is still far too small for the number of children the Council wishes to squeeze in and no amount of building upwards will disguise the fact that the playing area is not sufficient. The school is situated in a residential area and since it is surrounded by houses and roads, there is no possibility of acquiring extra space. The outdoor space is already limited with no grassy areas. The teachers have little parking as it is and the school is in a CPZ. Given that not everyone can use public transport, where would all the new teachers park? Exempting them from the CPZ means that the local residents then have less parking. The school buildings are very old and expansion is only possible by building new blocks and there is insufficient space in which to do this. To try to fit nearly a third more pupils in the existing school would be almost impossible.
The inability to acquire extra space means that all building work has to take place very close to the children and cannot be adequately partitioned from them. In other words, they will be trying to learn whilst there is hammering and drilling going on around them, not to mention clouds of dust and dirt for them to inhale. Noise pollution and air pollution are detrimental to their health. Furthermore, partitioning whilst building work is carried out and the proposed portable classrooms for use when the Year 6 block is demolished will greatly diminish the size of the playground.
After the expansion is completed, children would have staggered play times and staggered meal times. This would result in some children trying to concentrate whilst others are being noisy outside. Some children going hungry as they are forced to eat a late lunch and others not having time to eat all their lunch as they have to make way for the next shift. The area proposed for use as a canteen is an extension to the existing hall. This will mean that tables and chairs need to be put out for lunch each day and put away after. There is no indication of who will have to do this. Will the teachers have to waste valuable time on this since the pupils are too young? Furthermore, tables and chairs would ruin any nice polished surface.
Given that the LA is expanding the number of forms of entry for September 2009 by 7.5 and is now consulting for an additional 4.5 (total 12 forms), there is a clear need for some new schools in the area. As the LA is already considering a new secondary school, it should be possible to find a suitable site for a new primary school. At the meeting in January we were advised that the LA had contacted the King Fahad Academy which owns the school in Pope's Lane (a few minutes walk from Mount Carmel and Little Ealing Primary Schools) to see if they were willing to sell and that they weren't. The Academy appears to be used mostly at weekends at the moment and vacant during the week. Surely the LA could consider the possibility of renting, sharing or leasing the site? This really would be an ideal alternative since the site was a secondary school and is very large with a Covenant preventing it from being used for anything other than education. I believe it would be worth the LA trying to contact them again as this is a potential source of income for them which would greatly help the local community.
The current ethos of the school is small and friendly rather than large and daunting (the "Little" in Little Ealing). Following expansion, the whole school would never be able to fit into the hall in order to sit together in an assembly or manage joint events. Reception children would take longer to settle in. The Council's attitude to this was that since they are obliged to find places for all children, should the proposed plans be rejected, they would simply force the school to have 2 ½ forms of entry which is something which neither teachers nor parents wish to see happen. In order to accommodate the extra children, portable classrooms would be placed on the site and the £5 million proposed to be spent on expansion would not be spent on this school. Yes, £5 million is a nice carrot, but I believe it would be better spent on a new school site.
A further option that the Council simply won't consider, is to move the catchment areas so children are more evenly distributed between the existing schools. This would decrease a lot of the pressure on Little Ealing and ensure that other schools are not undersubscribed. I would strongly urge the Council to reconsider this possibility.
Having experienced similar conditions in my own schooling in the 1980s, I know that this kind of upheaval creates an unsettled environment, the pupils' behaviour deteriorates and additional pressure is heaped on teachers, all of which causes standards to be greatly lowered. This would be a huge shame as the school as just achieved a very good OFSTED report and it would undo all the hard work which went into improving standards. It is also unbelievable that despite the government's Primary Capital Programme (PCP), Ealing primary schools would be returning to the low standards and overcrowding of the 1980s.
44. I wish to register our objections to the plans to expand Little Ealing Primary School. This is based on:
1) Lack of proper consultation 2) shambolic meeting on 29th January at the school which made no attempt to persuade the parents that it could be a good thing - no selling of the advantages ie of the improved factilities, leading me to believe it was going to be forced through anyway 3) no clear reason why another school couldn't be built 4) no clear reason why the Grange could not be expanded -as it has more physical space 5) I subsequently learned that the plans were wrong, there was one classroom short - and that there was no guarantee that the specialist classrooms would be included in the final plans 6) health and safety is a huge issue as the playground would be so congested and PE lessons would be impacted by tiered lunchtimes/playtimes 7) congestion at arrival and departure time / traffic worries 8) huge disruption while the building work is going on - no clear strategy as to how to deal with this 9) the amount of time spent on crowd management rather than educating out children concerns us 10) there was no mention whatsoever of how the school would be better with the expansion works - only that it would be able to house more children
All in all - the presentation and consultation process has been shambolic and ridiculous which worries us a huge amount -the detail has just not been taken care of - it seems this project will just be forced through and all the children will suffer.
45. I am writing to register my objections to the proposed expansion of Little Ealing Primary School, where my son is a pupil.
I urge Ealing Borough Council not to pursue the plans in their present form, and to reconsider other options for increasing primary school capacity in the area.
I believe very strongly that the current plans for Little Ealing School are simply too detrimental on a number of grounds, and are not in the best interests of the school and its pupils - present and future. I have seen no evidence that other options have been properly and fully explored.
CONGESTION
Little Ealing is already one of, if not the most crowded school sites in the Borough, and the proposals in their current form would cram in hundreds more children.
The movement of so many pupils around such a small area throughout the school day is likely to create a suffocatingly crowded atmosphere.
Such a large increase in numbers is likely to mean staggered playtimes, lunch and assemblies. Groups will have to take turns and rotate through the playground, dining room and classrooms - all within a few feet of each other - as there simply won't be room for them all to eat or play together.
On a larger school site this may not be a serious problem, but in such a small area it will.
Some children will be in their classrooms trying to study, while scores of others are either in the playground, naturally making a lot of noise, or using the dining room and also making a lot of noise. With classrooms, dining facilities and playground all adjacent to each other, this threatens to disrupt lessons and distract children during a significant part of each school day.
During building work the already-small playground will be further restricted by the building site itself as well as temporary class rooms. For many months - quite possibly two school years - it will be extremely difficult for children to play freely out of doors.
Astonishingly we learn that the increase in pupil numbers will begin at the same time as building work, when the building site and temporary classrooms will take up more of the play ground.
This has serious implications for pupils' activity levels, health and well-being as well as behaviour - particularly their ability to let off steam by running around.
The proposed timing presumably reflects the urgent need to boost capacity across the borough, but we believe the effect on the school will be extremely detrimental.
While few pupils appear to travel to school by car, and road traffic is not a major issue, the pavements themselves become very congested at school drop-off and pick-up times, and this problem will be worsened.
ETHOS
The likely loss of whole-school assemblies will have a very negative impact on Little Ealing School's ethos and atmosphere. The sense of togetherness which the school has engendered among the children in recent years is very valuable. It is a key part of what makes the school special. The plans as currently formulated will place it in jeopardy.
The need for staggered play times will also limit scope for children to mix and socialise with other age groups - an important part of their social development.
We are also led to understand that the huge numbers of children would mean to the start and finish of the school day being staggered by age group. For many parents with siblings in different years this would be wholly unacceptable, and we urge you to consider the disruptive impact on family life and childcare arrangements.
CONSULTATION
I wish to record our deep unhappiness at the way the consultation has been run.
There is no firm detail available to parents regarding the rebuilding plans.
Building plans have been displayed and handed out to parents, showing various supposed benefits of expansion, including a newly-rebuilt classroom block to the north of the site. This 'carrot' has been dangled in front of us while we are being asked to decide whether to support or object to the plans.
Yet when pressed, council officials have admitted that the plans shown to parents in a bid to build support were 'indicative', or 'just to give an idea of how it could look', and may bear no relation to what actually ends up happening.
When pressed further, they confirmed that there may be no new buildings at all, or simply an extra storey built on top of one of the classroom blocks.
I appreciate the difficulty in trying to show definitive plans at such an early stage in the process, but the status of these plans was not made clear, and parents were allowed to think that the downsides of expansion would definitely be balanced by the upside of rebuilt facilities, which may not materialise.
At best this is careless communication, at worst downright dishonest.
Either way parents have not been well informed.
Ealing Borough Council has already appointed a building contractor, when the consultation is supposedly still going on. This smacks of bad faith, and a 'done deal'.
The last public meeting was deeply unsatisfactory. Quite apart from the attitude shown by council officials, who made little effort to conceal the fact that they regarded the plans as a fait accompli, many parents were left unable to ask questions or voice their views.
I urge you to extend the consultation, to schedule another meeting and to be much clearer in the information you provide to parents.
ALTERNATIVES
Given the negative impact of cramming hundreds more children into Little Ealing School, it is clearly important that all alternatives should be fully explored.
I see no evidence that this is the case.
I are told it is impossible to find any potential site to build a new school. In a borough the size of Ealing, this is difficult to accept.
Other alternatives spring to mind. For example, moving the preschool nursery out of its current accommodation and placing it on a new site - which could have a far smaller footprint than that needed for a new school - or a leased building. That would free up classrooms and extra playground space at Little Ealing, going some way to easing many of the problems referred to above. The nursery could maintain links with Little Ealing School, even if it were located some distance away.
SUMMARY
You'll be aware by now of the strength of opposition among parents at the school. To an official in your position, who has to come up with a workable solution to the borough's needs, I imagine this is tiresome. But I urge you to pause. The parents know the school and the area well.
Nobody doubts that you and your staff will have worked hard on the plans, and are trying to use your professional skills to do the best for the Borough. But the current plans for Little Ealing School will not produce a legacy of which you can be proud. Ealing enjoys a hard-won reputation for very good schools. In the rush to increase capacity, there is now a very real risk that something valuable will be lost.
Please think again.
46. I am writing to register my objections to the proposed expansion of Little Ealing School. I am very strongly opposed to the proposals primarily on the grounds of the lack of space at the school but also because expansion would significantly alter the school’s character and because of the disruption to my children’s school life which will be caused by the building works.
Little Ealing is a school with very little outdoor space. There are no playing fields or green areas (other than the small garden areas which the school strives to make the best of). It is landlocked. Whilst the preliminary plans attempt to maximize teaching space, there is no provision for extra outdoor play space other than a small area which will be released by demolishing the current canteen. I have worked at the school as an SMSA and have seen the potential for accidents in the playground even now with the current pupil numbers. An increase in numbers without an increase in outdoor play space will mean an increase in accidents.
The amount of outdoor space which would be available to the children during the 15 to 18 months of the building works makes this project completely unworkable. Not only would a section of the main playground and the basketball court be blocked off, yet more of the playground would be taken up with temporary classrooms. If the children cannot run around freely outdoors during their playtimes, their behaviour in class will deteriorate and teacher retention is likely to be affected as a result.
In terms of learning space, there is at present the opportunity for children to move between different working spaces; the art room, the music room, the ICT suite, and in the case of Reception children, their ‘middle room’ for arts and crafts. According to the current plans, Reception’s middle room will be lost. Reception pupils will lose the opportunity to mix with their peers in a learning environment and will be couped up in the same room all day. This is not conducive to good concentration and learning and is bound to lead to increased classroom management difficulties. As a parent of a 5 year old and a 6 year old, I know from my own experience how important it is to head off deteriorating behaviour by giving young children changes of scene during the day.
The current plans are wrong in that they are a classroom short. This must mean that one of the other ‘special’ rooms listed above will be lost.
The school already suffers from congestion around the school gates at the beginning and end of the day, to the extent that it can be worryingly difficult to keep track of younger siblings in the general melee. If expansion goes ahead and the routes into and out of school remain the same, this will represent a serious health and safety hazard. Whilst I note that the preliminary plans attempt to create a second entrance/exit onto Hereford Road, I understand that this may not get planning permission. I have been told by a Council representative that the answer in this case will be to stagger children’s times of arrival and departure. This would be completely unworkable because parents of siblings would cause increased congestion by having to collect one child and then wait around for the correct departure time of another or others.
If expansion goes ahead without a second exit, this will represent a serious threat to the safety of pupils and staff in the event of a fire.
It is currently only just physically possible for the whole school to fit into the main hall for class assemblies. Expansion along the lines of the current plans will mean that the school will lose this opportunity and pupils will miss out on the feelings of inclusion and community which these events engender and which give the school its unique atmosphere. Whatever the Council may say to the contrary, the school’s character will change; it will cease to be a warm, friendly environment where pupils and staff from different years recognize and help each other.
I appreciate that the Council is faced with serious problems as a result of demographic change. The size of the school’s ‘footprint’, however, is such that it is completely unsuitable for expansion. There is a great deal of proposed development of public spaces in Ealing. Instead of tinkering around the edges with a quick fix which will store up difficulties for the future, why is the Council not including plans for a new school within these proposals? Expansion really is a short term fix: within two years, siblings of the extra pupils will be taking up all the additional places and local families with first children seeking a place at the school will back in the position which they are in today.
47. I am writing to register my objection to the proposed expansion of Little Ealing Primary School.
As a parent of two children at the school I have major concerns about the changes proposed on a number of grounds. I really believe that the concerns of the children attending the school have not been taken into consideration. An expansion of the school will adversely affect the ethos of the school, which is the very reason this school is so successful and has become the popular sort after school it is today. There is a real sense of belonging and nuturing which is so important to children that has been created in the school thanks to shared assemblies and activities, which involve the whole school. With more children in this already stretched space this would no longer be possible.
I also know that two years of building works at the school will greatly affect my children's learning environment and will be detrimental to their education. This will all be going on with an additional 30 or possibly 60 children already attending the school, if the bulk intake happening this September continues. An already small play area will be overloaded with the only option to greater stagger playtimes and lunch times (even more than is already done).
Also as a resident of Hereford Road I am concerned about the level of disruption and congestion we will be living with, both during the building works and after. When the Grange school was being expanded the green space opposite was utillised for construction vehicles etc, what will happen in the case of Little Ealing? Should I expect the road outside my front door to be turned into a temporary building site? This is not acceptable. What then once the expansion works are complete, extra congestion at drop off and pick up times? The school gates and road are already congested and sometimes to a dangerous level. There has been rumour of staggered drop-off and pick-up times, but how will this help? Parents are not likely to go away and then return later with their next child- what will happen is that we will have more parents and children hanging around outside the school gates and in cars. Not a sensible solution.
We have to face facts that Little Ealing is a contained enviroment- the grounds are not about to get any bigger and neither should the school. This really does stink of trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.
I think the council response to the school place problem is also very short sighted. It wasn't that long ago that the Grange school was expanded, didn't the council consider this problem then and have the foresight to build a school to the size that the area actually needs? Also what will happen a few years down the line- will we not be faced with this as a recurring problem? The catchment areas of all the boroughs schools need to be reviewed and changed to be more realistic. This would then determine exactly where the problem areas are. It is ridiculous that we have families to the south of Little Ealing Lane walking past Little Ealing School to go to the Grange, while families at the north of Lammas park have a place at the school! Isn't it now time to invest in building a new school. There seems to be no problem in the council giving the go-ahead to new shopping areas in Ealing, what about the core amenities we need for our growing population?
I hope mine and other parents points will be taken into consideration, but fear the council have already made up their mind and this is all just a formality. I wait to be proved wrong.
48. I am writing to you in response to the proposal to expand Little Ealing Primary School.
I strongly support this proposal. I live within the Little Ealing catchment, but such is the demand for places, my two sons would only stand a chance of admission if expansion goes ahead.
I understand current parents' concerns about the very limited outdoor space at this school, and trust the council will do everything in its power to address this.
However I am anxious however that voices such as mine - which support expansion but are not yet part of the school - should also be heard.
49. As a parent and former Governor of Little Ealing Primary school I am writing to object to the proposed expansion of the school for a number of reasons.
* Firstly I feel that this expansion is not in the best interests of the pupils at the school, as there is very little outdoor space already at Little Ealing for children to play in. This will obviously be even more congested with the addition of 210 children and will have a detrimental effect on the quality of the experience of the children at the school. It will also have an effect on learning activities outside the classroom such as those recommended by the DCFS and the weekly entitlement of 5 hours of PE for all pupils. * In addition, should the expansion go ahead, it seems ridiculous that the school will be asked to take an extra 60 children - 30 in Sept 2009 and 30 in 2010 before any additional facilities are in place. I feel this will certainly have a negative impact on my child's experience of the last 2 years at Little Ealing, particularly if the year 6 block will be demolished and be replaced by temporary buildings during her final year at Primary school. * I also have to ask why try and squeeze ever more children into a small space when other local schools such as Fielding and Selborne have much larger outdoor areas.
* I also believe that the expansion will have a detrimental effect on the ethos of Little Ealing as a school. There is a great deal of research from Ofsted and in the U.S. of the benefits of smaller schools. Ofsted argued "the quality of teaching in small schools is generally better than in larger schools" and that they are well placed to deliver on the Every Child Matters indicators. Other research shows:
Student attitudes toward school in general and toward particular school subjects are more positive in small schools. Student social behaviour is more positive in small schools. Levels of extra-curricular participation are much higher and more varied in small schools. Student attendance is better in small schools. Student academic and general self-regard is higher in small schools. Inter-personal relationships between and among students, teachers and administrators are more positive in small schools. Teachers attitudes towards their work are more positive in small schools.
* Finally it seems to me from the meeting that took place at Little Ealing that the council has not properly investigated alternative arrangements and questions. In addition - why is the council building ever more large structures in central Ealing when clearly there is not the infrastructure of local schools and other facilities to support them?
I look forward to hearing from you on these matters.
50.
I am writing to register my objections to the proposed expansion of Little Ealing Primary School, where our son is a pupil.
I urge Ealing Borough Council not to pursue the plans in their present form, and to reconsider other options for increasing primary school capacity in the area.
I believe very strongly that the current plans for Little Ealing School are simply too detrimental on a number of grounds, and are not in the best interests of the school and its pupils - present and future. I have seen no evidence that other options have been properly and fully explored.
CONGESTION
Little Ealing is already one of, if not the most crowded school site in the Borough, and the proposals in their current form would cram in hundreds more children.
The movement of so many hundreds of pupils around such a small area throughout the school day is likely to create a suffocatingly crowded atmosphere.
Such a large increase in numbers is likely to mean staggered playtimes, lunch and assemblies. Groups will have to take turns and rotate through the playground, dining room and classrooms - all within a few feet of each other - as there simply won't be room for them all to eat or play together.
On a larger school site this may not be a serious problem, but in such a small area it will.
Some children will be in their classrooms trying to study, while scores of others are either in the playground, naturally making a lot of noise, or using the dining room and also making a lot of noise. With classrooms, dining facilities and playground all adjacent to each other, this threatens to disrupt lessons and distract children during a significant part of each school day.
During building work the already-small playground will be further restricted by the building site itself and temporary class rooms. For many months - quite possibly two school years - it will be extremely difficult for children to play freely out of doors.
Astonishingly we learn that the increase in pupil numbers will begin at the same time as building work, when the building site and temporary classrooms will take up more of the play ground.
This has serious implications for pupils' activity levels, health and well-being as well as behaviour - particularly their ability to let off steam by running around.
The proposed timing presumably reflects the urgent need to boost capacity across the borough, but we believe the effect on the school will be extremely detrimental.
ETHOS
The likely loss of whole-school assemblies will have a very negative impact on Little Ealing School's ethos and atmosphere. The sense of togetherness which the school has engendered among the children in recent years is very valuable. It is a key part of what makes the school special. The plans as currently formulated will place it in jeopardy.
The need for staggered play times will also limit scope for children to mix and socialise with other age groups - an important part of their social development.
We are also led to understand that the huge numbers of children would mean to the start and finish of the school day being staggered by age group. For many parents with siblings in different years this would be wholly unacceptable, and we urge you to consider the disruptive impact on family life.
CONSULTATION
I wish to record my deep unhappiness at the way the consultation has been run.
There is no firm detail available to parents regarding the rebuilding plans.
Building plans have been displayed and handed out to parents, showing various supposed benefits of expansion, including a newly-rebuilt classroom block to the north of the site. This 'carrot' has been dangled in front of us while we are being asked to decide whether to support or object to the plans.
Yet when pressed, council officials have admitted that the plans shown to parents in a bid to build support for the plans were 'indicative' , or ' just to give an idea of how it could look', and may bear no relation to what actually ends up happening.
When pressed further, they confirmed that there may be no new buildings at all, or simply an extra story built on top of one of the classroom blocks.
I appreciate the difficulty in trying to show definitive plans at such an early stage in the planning process, but the status of these plans was not made clear, and parents were allowed to think that the downsides of expansion would definitely be balanced by the upside of rebuilt facilities, which may not materialise.
At best this is careless communication, at worst downright dishonest.
Either way parents have not been well informed.
Ealing Borough Council has already appointed a building contractor, when the consultation is supposedly still going on. This smacks of bad faith, and a 'done deal'.
The last public meeting was deeply unsatisfactory. Quite apart from the attitude shown by officials, who made little effort to conceal the fact that they regarded the plans as a fait accompli, many parents were left unable to ask questions or voice their views.
I urge you to extend the consultation, to schedule another meeting and to be much clearer in the information you provide to parents.
ALTERNATIVES
Given the negative impact of cramming hundreds more children into Little Ealing School, it is clearly important that all alternatives should be fully explored.
I have seen no convincing evidence that this is the case.
We are told it is impossible to find any potential site to build a new school. In a borough the size of Ealing, this is difficult to accept.
Other alternatives spring to mind. For example, moving the preschool nursery out of its current accommodation and placing it on a new site - which could have a far smaller footprint than that needed for a new school - or a leased building. That would free up classrooms and extra playground space at Little Ealing, going some way to easing many of the problems referred to above. The nursery could maintain links with Little Ealing School, even if it were located some distance away.
SUMMARY
You'll be aware by now of the strength of opposition among parents at the school. To an official in your position, who has to come up with a workable solution to the borough's needs, I imagine this is tiresome.
But I urge you to pause. The parents know the school and the area well.
Nobody doubts that you and your staff will have worked hard on the plans, and are trying to use your professional skills to do the best for the Borough.
But the current plans for Little Ealing School will not produce a legacy of which you can be proud.
Ealing enjoys a hard-earned reputation for good quality schools. In the rush to solve the current capacity problems, you risk destroying something of great value which will not easily be restored.
51. I am responding to your consultation of primary schools in central Ealing, particularly those for Little Ealing and Fielding.
I think the expansion should be treated holistically, rather than on an individual school basis. I also think that options should be investigated and put forward for public consultation, as they were for the Council's recycling arrangements.
The particular other schemes I think you need to consider are:-
1) Adding another form to Grange instead of Little Ealing. Space available for expansion was previously seen as a key criteria for deciding which schools to expand. Grange is also only slightly down the pecking order in popularity from Little Ealing and with a slightly better Value Added score. It certainly has more space available on site than Little Ealing, has a design more suited for expansion, and has Council unsold land immediately to the north should more space be required. Building there would be much less disruptive (and probably cheaper) than building at Little Ealing.
2) Build a new 2 form entry school on Popefield playing fields. This site was previously considered as a potential one for the new Grange school. Then shift westward the catchment areas of Fielding, Little Ealing and Grange schools. Again, this would be less disruptive (and probably cheaper) than building on the sites of schools in current use.
52.
I am writing as a current parent of a child at Little Ealing Primary School, in relation to the proposed expansion of the School. I understand that the proposals are currently in a consulation period and therefore would like to provide an opinion.
My husband and I fundamentally disagree with the current proposal to expand the school. This is foremost because of the considerable disruption that will take place during the building work and the impact that this will have on our sons education. Given the size of the site it is impossible to consider how such expansion could take place without such disruption. This would not create an environment conducive to learning or to good behaviour.
Furthermore, we believe that once expanded, the school site will be massively overcrowded. Already the children have no access to playing fields and the specialist areas of the school are under resourced. A 50% increase in pupils will not alleviate these issues. I am well aware that the current proposals meet govt guidelines for space criteria (near the minimum though) and would urge reconsideration on this basis.
We do not have an issue with building a 'new' Little Ealing and closing the current site, if this would assist the clear pupil over-population in the catchment area. We are not wed to the current site or to a school with a 2 form entry. In our view a site such as Blondin Park etc could be chosen. We have not taken this idea from any parent forum, it has been our common-sense view for some time now.
In our view, the disruption that would result from expanding the current site would be unacceptable and will only result in a cramped school for our children.
As residents and tax payers of Ealing Borough Council, we would appreciate your feedback to this email in due course.
53.
I am writing to you to oppose the Local Authorities plans to expand Little Ealing School. I have two children at the school (Year … and Year …) and I do not consider the changes to be in the best interests of any the children at the school now or in the near future. The site is simply not big enough to house that many children in a safe, happy environment and allow them to get the best education. The outdoor space is currently limited and with less space per child in the future, I do not believe children will be able to play safely. I gather the approach to get around this issue would be to stagger play and lunch times even more than is done currently but this is not an acceptable solution because it will generate intolerable amounts of noise. There would be almost constant traffic of children on their way to/from play, outdoor PE, indoor PE, assembly, lunch, drama, which would cause a lot of noise disruption to the classes passed on the way either in classrooms or in the halls. This would happen no matter how well- behaved the children were. Whatever goes on in the hall can be heard in the classrooms and vice versa. Classrooms can be very noisy even when there is a lot of learning going on and to be constrained and pressured into making less or little noise when actually it's not appropriate to the activity will put unnecessary pressure on already overstretched teachers. Also, if the teacher requires quiet for the activity at hand but there is a lot of noise from the class in the hall or adjacent classrooms it makes concentration impossible. This will have an adverse impact on the childrens learning. Staggered playtimes would mean that the playgrounds were used for a lot more of the day making less time available for Outdoor PE. Would there be enough time for all the classes to have this lesson once a week?
The same follows for staggered assemblies. The number of assemblies would increase but at the same time more hall time would be required by more classes doing indoor PE, Dance, Gymnastics and Drama. Would all children get to do their two PE lessons a week? Or would it be squeezed out of the curriculum when it matters more than ever for health reasons. Should the proposed expansion go ahead these issues would be magnified hugely during any building work when the council would already be expecting the school to expand but then limit the outdoor space by a factor of around half to allow space for the contractors to work. Having studied the preliminary plans I do not see how any child is supposed to learn in temporary classrooms a matter of feet away from major construction work. Having a child in year … currently I am extremely concerned that her final years at school and her SATS results will be affected by trying to learn on a building site. I appreciate your need to provide additional primary school places but as Little Ealing is the most confined site in your plans I firmly believe you should employ a different approach. Eighteen months of major building work including the removal of a building with an asbestos roof concerns me greatly on the ground of health and safety. I am also very concerned following drop in session with your representatives on Thursday that the information you have been providing to parents is completely misleading. At the public meeting you issued preliminary plans and suggested that they showed that the school would benefit from specialist teaching rooms which was one of the major objections raised by parents during the last consultation. Many parents have gone away with those plans and believe that these rooms WILL therefore be provided. However, when you representatives were questioned about detail on the plans (such as the fact that you have put a classroom in the school office so would that mean the loss of one of the specialist rooms?) the response was that they were only ‘indicitive’ and would almost certainly change a lot. When questioned about the risk to our childrens hearing whilst foundations were dug for the 2 story block of 8 class rooms the response was that the plans were ‘indicitive’ and perhaps it would be possible build an extra floor on the existing building. This surely would provide only two or three extra classrooms not the extra 5 on your plans. Again the obvious question is will this result in the loss of two further specialist teaching areas. It seems to me that the authority are making no guarantees of minimum investment or facilities and yet you have attempted to get parents on side with plans that mean nothing. Quite frankly I find this misleading at best and verging on dishonest. I would urge you strongly to reconsider the proposed expansion or at the very least allow the school to wait until adequate facilities exist before you admit extra children. How can it be safe to allow 60 extra children over two years to join the school during the building process? I believw the authority have a duty to provide precise details about how safety and successful learning can be achieved during such major work when all other schools you have rebuilt have had more space than Little Ealing.
54.
I am writing to lodge my objection of the proposed expansion of Little Ealing Primary School (LEPS) for the following reasons:-
1 The school is simply not big enough.
Even if building work can be done to accommodate an extra 180 children the outside space is not adequate for the requirements of the school day.
As it is now meal times are staggered; this puts the younger children under enormous pressure to eat their lunch quickly. I am not the only parent who regularly finds that most of a packed lunch has gone uneaten because of time restraints. How does this lunchtime fast turnover production line fit in with encouraging healthy eating?
Staggered break times would be hugely distracting for children trying to concentrate on their lessons whilst their peers play outside.
Any suggestion of staggered start times to cut back on pedestrian traffic in the mornings is ludicrous. How are families meant to cope if they have more than one child? These parents and children will still be hanging around the school gates or playground.
Making the children have different break times means they may never get to mix with older/younger year groups. How does this add to the community feeling of the school? How does this teach the children about getting on with others? How does this enable any kind of buddy system often used by schools to encourage responsibility for others and combating bullying?
2 The disruption caused by demolition and building work will be detrimental to the education of current pupils
The proposed expansion is aimed at successful schools yet Little Ealing Primary School results have been on the decline since 2004. In the 2007 Ofsted report this 'dip' in test results was put down to an unsettled year group. How much more 'unsettled' will any year group be having to deal with the daily noise, inconvenience and distraction of building work going on around them.
The results in 2007 for Grange school were better than those of Little Ealing. Why are they not being considered for expansion when they have much more external space?
It has been said that there is not a demand for places at Grange, however the demand for places at LEPS has been an issue since 1995. Had the catchment area been redefined so that it's boundary was the railway line this would have lessened the demand for places at LEP and utilised the places available at Grange. The council was aware of the problems caused by the catchment area before the new Grange school was built. They could have found part of the solution to the current problem years ago.
3 Health and Safety concerns
I am very concerned about the procedures necessary in the event of an emergency situation. If the school needs to be evacuated, where are 600+ children going to be taken safely in the event of evacuating the school? LEPS is next to a busy road. Can you guarantee that all children will be escorted quickly and without putting them in danger?
There is a proposal to move the kitchen facilities to the main school building. If the school had a fire in the main building it would block the exits onto the street. Do you propose to keep the children trapped in the playground till the fire is extinguished? In a confined space in a potentially explosive situation?
Having more children will limit physical activity during break times. How does this fit in with the Government's fitness drive to combat childhood obesity?
4 Staffing issues
My own children have had very disrupted starts to their time at LEPS with changes of teachers halfway through the school year. How is staff morale going to be affected by the working conditions during building work? What new teachers are going to attracted to a job on a building site?
I understand the need for extra places in schools, but I do not believe that the council has explored all avenues.
No one has mentioned the possibility of moving the nursery to a different site. There is a disused Scout hut on Popes Lane. Has the council looked into buying the land it stands on as a site for nursery? It is not that far from school and the different start/finish times to the rest of the school make drop off and pick up possible for parents of siblings.
The suggestion of building on the allotments in Blondin park has been ruled out without even being explored. There are unused allotments between Popes Lane and Almond Avenue, these could be offered to current users of the Blondin Park ones and a school on this site would be ideally situated for those wishing to use it as well as providing excellent scope for sporting activities.
It has been reported that the owners of the King Fahid Academy on Little Ealing Lane do not wish to sell. Why not propose a joint owner ship to provide a nursery site for LEPS during the week and accommodation for their needs at the weekend?
The decision to push for this expansion despite objections from those who will be affected the most without looking fully at any other alternative is wrong and it puts the education of many in jeopardy. The council has a responsibility to provide a good education for all. The current proposals are short sighted and look set to cause long term problems for those currently at LEP and for those who end up in a school too small to offer them a well rounded start to their educational journey.
55.
56.
57.
I am writing regarding the proposal to expand Little Ealing Primary School.
I have been away last week and though the deadline has passed I hope you will acknowledge and respond to my email in person.
While expansion looks inevitable in the current circumstances (though in reality there has been no consultation, as such), I feel very strongly that expansion DOES NOT go ahead UNTIL the building work is complete. It is unacceptable that new classes are introduced during the building work and when the playground area is reduced by half. This will have a profound effect on the school atmosphere, the children and their learning, both for current and new pupils. The start of a third form entry has to be delayed until the work is complete in September 2011 at the earliest. To go ahead prior the building completion is unacceptable.
I would be grateful for an acknowledgement of my email and an update on the situation regarding the start date for expansion, which I trust can and will be delayed.
58.
59.
North Ealing Primary School
1. I am writing to object to the expansion of N Ealing primary school. Having looked at Around Ealing I expected something on the website to guide me thro responding to the consultation. I can't find anything so I don't know the format or grounds on which I can object. If I have missed something on the site, please let me know.
My objections are: - as a parent I think N Ealing school is big enough. To expand it to 3 form entry will completely alter the character of the school. Its strength is its community basis - everyone knows everyone else and the children benefit from knowing others in the 2 classes. I know from people who attend Fielding that it is not the case that children in the year know all the others - there are simply too many. Primary children benefit from a small scale. - as an local resident I think the area is saturated enough with children & young families who are drawn by the school and its good reputation. To add more school places will simply attract more people and the community balance will be even further distorted. Will we be arguing for 4 form entry in 5 years time?! - as a tax payer I think the Council and government should be targeting funding on those schools with a less good reputation. By building up the infrastructure and leadership at the 'less good' schools the borough would have a much more even distribution of families with children. There would be fewer property hot spots and fewer children would be the victim of the postcode lottery in school quality. - I agree that North Ealing should upgrade its reception block but this shouldn't be conditional on expansion of the school - the school is effectively being given no choice - The results of the consultation are compelling - neither staff nor local residents want this expansion. It seems perverse then that the Governors and Council are proceeding with these plans
2. We object very strongly to L.B.E.’s proposal to enlarge NEPS from September 2010 for the following reasons:
1. Environmental Damage
North Ealing Primary School’s site is already cramped and the proposed development will reduce outside space per pupil as the site itself is not expanding. The loss of green space and some trees on the site would be detrimental to the environment and contradicts green policy.
If the proposed development proceeds with the contractors’ compound area located in Pitshanger Park as planned, the grass area will be damaged. Heavy plant machinery will also damage the surrounding trees. Under Health & Safety such a contractors’ compound area would need to be totally secure and sectioned off from public access.
• How close will the compound boundary be to the public footpath leading to Woodbury Park Road? • How will heavy plant machinery and building materials gain access to the site with no restriction to public access and thoroughfare through this section of the park? • What risk assessments have been carried out with outcomes accessible to all who require such information?
The plan cannot go ahead unless such risk assessments have been produced and published.
2. The character of North Ealing Primary School will be spoilt
Further development of the school site will spoil the character of NEPS and its surrounding environment. The proposed new two-storey block will dominate the site and will not be in keeping with the rest of the buildings.
3. Increase in traffic/parking in the vicinity of the School caused by:
a. increase in out-of-catchment pupils
If projected birth rates prove to be overestimates then there will be an increase in out- of-catchment pupils, as pupils will be deflected from other local schools such as Hathaway, Montpelier and Drayton Green, resulting in an increase in traffic and parking.
b. community use of school buildings at weekends and in the evenings
Opening up the school buildings for use by the community at weekends and in the evenings will result in increased traffic, parking and disturbance in the surrounding area.
c. additional teaching staff and school support staff
Parking provision for the additional teaching staff and support staff is inadequate and needs to be re-thought. Woodbury Park Road is already overburdened with non- residential parking.
There is no evidence in the proposal of a traffic management plan which should clearly outline projections of increased vehicular flow and pedestrian traffic. The additional pupils will increase vehicular and pedestrian traffic.
• Where is the traffic management plan to show how this increase is to be monitored and managed?
4. Disruption during construction works
Many local residents (including ourselves) have already lived through the disruption caused by the construction of the new school building at NEPS and subsequent disruption caused by the development of the former NEPS land when 5 new houses were built.
As a result of poor planning, the more accessible portion of the school site has been developed/sold off first and now plans are being made to develop an extremely inaccessible part of the school site. Once again residents will have to endure months of uncertainty whilst the plans are considered and then months or years of disturbance whilst construction work takes place with heavy plant and equipment once again having to access the site.
Pupils of the school will also experience disturbance and disruption, and play areas will be reduced during construction works.
3.
4.
5.