Families win fight to stop Stoke-on-Trent school expansion in playing fields row

Plans to extend a city primary school to provide more places for pupils have been knocked back amid scores of objections. A new hall and classrooms had been proposed as part of the expansion of St Teresa's Catholic Primary School in Trent Vale.

The scheme also sought to introduce a new 46-space car park with a new path to the school running next to an existing football pitch that would be fenced off, all which would be outside of the existing school boundary. However, a planning application for the proposed development has been refused by Stoke-on-Trent City Council.

A total of 31 objections were made by residents who raised numerous concerns including the 'loss of recreation area well used by local residents including children and dog walkers'. Sport England and the council's sport and leisure team also registered their opposition as "the proposal to transfer the playing fields at Riverside Road to the school would result in two playing pitches that are currently community accessible being reduced to one pitch, which presumably would be managed by the school".

READ MORE: BBC TV licence fee to rise in 2025 - here's the damage

READ MORE: 55 more student flats set for approval in Newcastle town centre

In a report recommending refusal, case officer Karen Kent said: "The introduction of the car park within the Green Belt would have a visual effect both in terms of its hard surfacing and also visiting parked cars. The 2.5m fencing around the playing field includes no landscaping and would have a clear visual impact in that it would dissect a large portion of an existing field which currently has unrestricted public access to pedestrians.

"Spatially the two elements would have a clear impact upon openness as given the presence of the fencing and gating (including the restriction from the Riverside Road access point) there is spatially a loss of publicly available open space. The submission suggests the site would be available for the school and community use but there is no detail on how this would be achieved for the community.

"On face value, the introduction of fences and gates suggests access would be limited at some times which is not currently the case. Given the above, it is considered that the proposals would not preserve the openness of the Green Belt in this location both spatially and visually."

The report adds: "It is stated that existing arrangements are considered to be dangerous and cause nuisance to residents and that the new car park would alleviate this. There is no information to explain why the existing access arrangements are dangerous.

"The proposal confirms that the existing drop off facility at a nearby church would in fact be retained in addition to the proposed facility and the submitted Transport Assessment concludes that levels of collisions in the area are not an indication of an existing problem.

"Assertations that existing arrangements are dangerous are therefore given little weight. Submitted information also stresses that the Local Authority are supportive of the proposals given it would provide additional school places, help alleviate stresses in the education system and avoid the need for a new school to be built.

"No response has been received from the education team despite several consultations so the level of need for the spaces has not been confirmed. Nonetheless, it is not clear why the school places cannot be achieved without resulting the Green Belt harm as identified above."

It concludes: "The proposal would conflict with Green Belt policy. This harm is not outweighed as no clear case for very special circumstances has been made. The proposal would also result in the loss of an identified playing pitch. This is given substantial weight in the planning balance given the site's identification in the Playing Pitch Strategy and as it results in a pitch where there is an identified shortfall in pitch size.

"The submission includes poor design solutions within the proposal in the form of mesh fencing with no attempt to screen or mitigate and no justification for why such is necessary. Despite the applicant's statements that the site is being promoted by education colleagues, no comments have been received from such in response to the application.

"Nonetheless, even if such support was confirmed, it is not considered that such would outweigh the matters outlined above and the application is therefore recommended for refusal."

If you're on the lookout for local news, we have you covered with our FREE email newsletter - sign up in the box at the top of this story or click here.