|Another Neighbours Responds Prospect House School Application To Expand|
From neighbour & Secretary of the Fairhaven Freeholders
I would like to make a reply to Mrs Dianne Barrett’s very good letter concerning Prospect House. My husband and I are in fact the neighbours that came to see her to find out why she wants to increase her school from 200. She kindly explained to us the reasons in the same way she did in last week’s Newletter.
Indeed I can well appreciate why she as a head mistress of this very good school would want to increase the numbers. Our 2 children with their families live at 73 Putney Hill next door to the school – and 2 of our grandchildren are pupils at the school. Lucky for them that they walk to school! They both love the school as do their parents – and like many parents especially like it because it is the size it is.
We like many neighbours to the school reluctantly agreed with the Planning Department 20 years ago that the use of 75 Putney Hill should change from a residence to a school. The provision was given that the number of pupils would be restricted to 200.
In the 20 years things have changed. Yellow zig zag lines have been painted on the road in front of the school – thus doing away with several residential parking places. More flats have been created in our building alone bringing in more car owners as well as more car owners increasing in the other flats in the cul de sac where we and the school are. Car seat rules for children have also been brought in which means that an average sized car can only hold 2 children in the back. Hence many families that bring their children to Prospect House by car have above average sized cars which can carry more than 2 children in them. A cycle path diverting cyclists through our cul de sac has also been created in the last few months. The amount of traffic has therefore increased considerably over the last 20 years in our residential cul de sac.
I agree the collection time for children does not last long each day. But during that time the cars do not have enough space. Private driveways are often blocked – and cars are parked illegally on double yellow lines – and there is a lot of double parking. This of course is inevitable. But to add more cars to this is not inevitable. It can be stopped by not increasing the pupils from the present 200. In fact at the moment the school is not full, there are l6 vacant places. So the traffic volume is not at its worst as it is.
Another point mentioned by us and other neigbours as well as those neigbours adjoining the school at the back is the “noise level”. Yesterday was a sunny day and it would have been very nice to sit outside and have our lunch. But the noise from happy children playing is so loud we cannot. We have to keep our windows and doors closed and even so we hear the noise. The noise would of course be louder and last for longer hours with more children. The breaks would be staggered. And there is always the fear of holiday clubs and after school activities.
We did go and see Mrs Barratt not so long ago about the “noise” as we had found it had increased. We wondered why this was. Mrs Barratt thought long and hard and then said it must be because there had been an increase in the amount of boys that term. We know for a fact that more pupils means louder noise in the garden next door. We really do not want this.
My husband and I both work from home as do our children. As it is our work is disturbed – no amount of closing windows keeps out the happy sound.
Mr Alex Rentoul the owner of Prospect House has two other schools – one in Chiswick and one in Kensington. When he bought the school about 10 years ago he bought it with the restriction of 200 pupils. We residents would like this restriction to remain. And we look to the local council to keeping to their original word.
If you would like to comment or object to the expansion of the school from 200 to 280 go to link http://tinyurl.com/63cg9ex by Monday 28th March.
If you would like to learn more about the planning application - click here.
July 14, 2011