Advertisement
U-turn fury over danger nursery
Reporter: BEATRIZ AYALA
Date online: 13 February 2012
Furious residents have called planning permission given after two previous refusals is an “accident waiting to happen”.
Springhead householders and ward councillors are up in arms after the plans — previously turned down by Oldham Council — were approved by a planning inspector on appeal.
The application, for a 30-space children’s day nursery at the site of the former Den Lane garage, Springhead, was refused last March due to lack of adequate drop-off and collect facilities.
A previous application was refused on highway-safety grounds in September 2010.
But following an appeal by the applicant, the Bristol-based planning inspectorate has reversed the decision.
Karen Turner, from neighbouring Peels Avenue, said: “Myself and another five residents sent a letter to the planning inspectorate stating our objections.
“These included lack of adequate picking-up and dropping-off facilities, the site being too small for development, noise and lack of privacy. It was refused on road-safety issues, so to see it approved has left us extremely shocked.
“We’ve got enough nurseries around and we don’t need another.”
Planning Inspector Mel Middleton visited the site a month ago.
He felt the planned two space layout could cope with demand morning and evening, with extra cars able to park in nearby Peels Avenue.
The inspector said Den Lane traffic speeds were low and there had been no reported accidents near the site over the past five years.
But Mrs Turner said: “We’ve objected from the very first application, but I don’t think we’ve been listened to at all by the planning inspector.”
Councillor Valerie Sedgwick, Saddleworth West and Lees, said: “To me, there has been no common sense used in making this decision.
“There are no footpaths in Den Lane but four schools are nearby, so parents and children walk up and down it.
“Where the Planning Inspectorate are coming from, I don’t know. I definitely think they’ve got it wrong this time.”
Comments
sounds like a bit of double standards. children already have to negotiate den lane in a morning and evening to get to these schools or bus stops so whats the problem with another much needed facility?
what should be done is slowing the idiots who see to think that driving at high speed is acceptable along den lane.
“We’ve got enough nurseries around and we don’t need another." so says Ms Turner. Obviously the developer thinks another one is a worthwhile investment and will have surely done their sums. A developer does not stump up cash for such a scheme without a business plan in place. A case of not in my back yard perhaps?
So much for Cameron's pledge to allow these sort of issues to be decided by local people. Once again Cameron is all talk and no action.
The Nursery will bring well needed jobs to the area, I see Libdems at the front of the anti-nursery debate do I spot nimby ism
What the planning inspectorate is missing is that parents dropping their children off are not going to walk from peels avenue. They'll simply stop as close to the door as possible regardless of any other traffic. Look outside any school at start/finish times and you can see that parents dont give a second though to anything or anybody.
what the locals are not seeing is the actual work that has gone into the new scheme, of which shows a new footpath to the front, and new drop off zones, this adaption actually is on the land of the developers and doesnt hinder the highway. this actually leaving approx 7.7 m for 2 cars to pass. they are also due to undertake a new white lining scheme, this further slowing the traffic, with an already speed of 19mph average only makes the highway safer.
Den Lane is a bad road to increase traffic on. This is a bad decision that might well lead to congestion and accidents.
NIMBY's rule OK.
Why are Liberals always 'furious' about things?
I note that the two refusals were when the Liberals/Tories ran Oldham. Obviously, their decisions were made on an irresponsible populist nimby basis; not on planning issues. That would be why the appeal was upheld. I wonder how much this has cost the council taxpayers.
Am I wrong or is this a private nursery? If so how would parents stop cars and let their children run along. Surely this is a pre-school nursery so children under 5. The developers must have surveyed the area for if this is wanted/would be used? Bring traffic calming to the area (humps etc) many high schools are on busy main road (which I never think is right) but think, North Chadd, the new John Newman, busy main roads, I think this is more to the do with the neighbours NIMBY.
Have Your Say
NIMBY'S
By chaddyender @ 13/02/2012 15:55:54