Objection to planning application 10/00406/FULL From: ……………………………………. ……………………………………. ……………………………………. …………………………………….

Director of City Development Dundee City Council Floor 15 Tayside House Dundee DD1 3RB. Date ……………………………………. Dear Sir/Madam, I wish to object to planning application 10/00406/FULL: Construction of a new 2 x 1 stream primary school and nursery school at the former Harris Academy Annexe Blackness Road Dundee DD2 1SF on the following valid planning grounds: I believe that the application should be rendered invalid at the present time and the correct procedure should be followed as regards the land ownership of the site. It is my understanding that the Council does not own the site. It would seem that the site is subject to an agreement to transfer the land; however, this is different to ownership. The correct land ownership should be acknowledged on the land ownership certificate as part of a new application. Appearance (layout, design, materials etc) / Effect on setting and character of Conservation Area. The proposal will not respect the character and appearance of the wider area. The proposal represents a building of poor contemporary homogeneous design. It has been designed merely to accommodate its internal uses, with no respect for the massing, scale, design and materials of the buildings in the surrounding area. The proposal will not relate well to the materials used in the construction of the historic buildings in the surrounding area, which form the identity of this part of Dundee. It will adversely impact on the character and appearance of the historic Blackness Road area and particularly on the adjacent Logie conservation area which has been designated as outstanding by Historic Scotland. The design statement quite openly exalts the buildings inability to reflect the materials used in the construction of buildings found in the surrounding area. The design of the building has had no external validation. As a major application, should it not have been subject to consultation with Architecture and Design Scotland? By virtue of design, scale, massing, finishing materials and landscaping the proposed school will have a significant impact upon the level of environmental quality afforded to neighbouring properties. The proposals are therefore considered not to comply with the requirements of Policy 1 of the adopted Local Plan. It has not been demonstrated that the Whole Life Costing of the building was carried out at the preapplication stage or has been carried out at this the planning application stage. This information is vital to demonstrate that a Whole Life Cost model has been developed early in the design process to influence the fundamental decisions regarding the building strategy (such as lightweight vs heavyweight construction, passive cooling vs mechanical air

Page 1 of 4

Objection to planning application 10/00406/FULL conditioning etc.) The materials used in the construction of the building will have a short life span. The whole life cost of the building has not been demonstrated. As such it has not been demonstrated that the building is sustainable in this respect or that it represents a value for money investment for the Dundee tax payer. It is my understanding that no consultation or explanation was provided which demonstrated the need for a new school on this site. It was presented as the only option which is not a choice. The decision to locate the school on this site was undertaken before consultation regarding a new school was undertaken. No information seems to have been submitted to allow for an assessment of the impact of the building on the health and well being of the children who will be using the school. Considerations such as: · At least 80% of occupied spaces will be adequately and evenly daylit with an average daylight factor exceeding 2% · For music accommodation (or multi purpose halls in primary schools with no music accommodation) where there is a commitment to achieve airborne sound insulation values that are at least 5dB higher, and impact sound insulation values that are at least 5dB lower, than the performance standards In my view the pre-application consultation carried out was not conducted in accordance with good practice, particularly with the pre-application exhibition of the nearly final proposal conducted on a bank holiday weekend which was prohibitive to many attending. The report complied by Scottish and Southern Electricity found that the site is not currently affected by electro magnetic fields. However, is it not the case that electro magnetic fields can be attracted and thus the danger here is that the building itself will encompass electrical equipment and this will in turn attract the electro magnetic fields from the nearby substation and even amplify them within the building which itself will act as a huge attraction and amplification device through the use of exterior metal cladding? It is most notable that points B and C on the survey relate to the proposed nursery and the closest point to the electrical substation. That there exists no guideline levels for a school end use where contaminants have been found in the soil. Because of the limitations of the Phase Two Intrusive Environmental site investigations, it would appear that the construction of a school on the site proposed would represent an experiment and the end users of the school the children and staff would be guinea pigs to determine whether they become contaminated by the pollutants present on the site. The survey itself acknowledges that the assessment carried out is in no way definitive, due to the large number of assumptions made. This is most likely the reason the site has not been developed up to this point as the previous or present owners had a survey carried out also and it is acknowledged that there are unknowns with respect to the remediation work such as the cost and consequences. I would suggest that a condition to deal with remediation is insufficient. It will not address the issue. Cost of remediation is unknown; the success of any remediation is unknown. We need to know in advance what the levels of contamination are and if remediation will be successful before an expensive mistake is propagated. Sufficient information is a must. Traffic, parking or access problems

Page 2 of 4

O Objection to planning application 10/00406/FULL The school will not benefit from adequate car parking space and the traffic assessment is inadequate. It notes the number of spaces available in the surrounding area, but does not counter the main concern, that the spaces currently available are oversubscribed (to a degree that a permit scheme has been muted by the Council) and that the spaces available can not possibly absorb the parking proposed by a new school of this scale. The access road will offer limited access. It is a singular road, offing one access point which will be prone to congestion at peak times. There has not been sufficient dropping off facilities offered as part of the proposal. The existing St Joseph’s school site has been the subject of numerous complaints and this school proposal provides fewer opportunities than at the existing at the current St Joseph’s site. The school if approved, it will be located on a busy section of Blackness Road which is subject to regular bus traffic. Blackness Road is a main arterial route into the city centre and at present, it is already congested. The introduction of a school at this point of the road will be severely detrimental to free traffic flow. A travel plan will not address this issue and it can not be mitigated by any measures at the disposal of the Council. A school travel plan (STP) will not be an appropriate solution to the traffic problems which will be experienced by the introduction of a school of this size and nature. STPs are successful where they relate to the local characteristics of the area and relate to schools with a small catchment area. The proposed schools will be out of character with this mainly residential area and they will have a large catchment area; thus these issues make it impossible to implement a successful STP. The plans make provision for dropping children off within the school grounds, however, this is totally inadequate and human nature dictates that people will drop children off on Blackness Road and Glenagnes Road no matter what arrangements are put in place on the school grounds. Residential amenity (overshadowing, overlooking, noise, odour, etc) At the pre-application stage, it was indicated that a biomass boiler would possibly be installed at the school. However, no details of boiler type have been included in the application. This is an important issue which should be addressed at the planning application stage. The type of boiler proposed will have a huge impact on the amenity of neighbouring residents. I would strongly object to the introduction of a biomass boiler. Many biomass boilers are maintenance heavy and are often backed up by gas fired boilers. Whilst a biomass boiler may be the cheapest option in terms of capital cost and is the easiest way to get additional funding available for low carbon fuels, it represents a false economy and other routes are more cost effective in terms of life cycle costs. Where will the pellets come from and will the source be local. As we have seen in the case of the boiler proposed at the Waterfront, the pellets would be shipped in from abroad which is neither sustainable or a low carbon option. Biomass boilers have proved to be a significant issue in Edinburgh which discourages the use of Biomass boilers due to concerns relating to potential health risks and their impact on local air quality (Edinburgh Council’s policy on biomass boilers Nov 2009). The boilers require a lot of long term maintenance which is expensive and will cost the Dundee taxpayer a substantial amount in the long term and achieve little if any in the way of carbon saving. In the report on mechanical services plant noise, section 3.2 states that noise levels due to the kitchen supply, kitchen canopy and toilet extract fans were found to be, respectively, NR44, NR43 and NR40. However, section 3.4 sates that noise inside the flat was found to be NR28, NR27 and NR25 respectively and that these noise levels are within the limit of NR35 which

Page 3 of 4

Objection to planning application 10/00406/FULL would normally apply to this kind of noise. However in permission 09/00786/FULM a condition ‘[a]ll noise from mechanical and electronic plant shall not exceed NR35 when measured 1m external to the facade of neighbouring residential properties’ was applied. Why is this development different? The development would not appear to be able to satisfy this condition. The condition seems to have been applied to many developments all around Dundee. Why is this development different to the many instances where it has been applied all around Dundee? If it is not different, why is this development being treated differently? An explanation of this point will be of interest to the many developers in Dundee who have spent time and money complying with the condition or have had their development refused as result of this condition. Loss of trees and landscaping issues Scotland’s education establishment is gearing up for the introduction of the curriculum for excellence, however, the grounds of the proposed new school building do not seem to provide a learning resource that can be used to facilitate development of environmental issues within the school curriculum. The proposal does not appear to include a survey of the application site at the pre-application stage or any subsequent stage with regard to bio-diversity. There does not seem to be information which demonstrates that a suitably qualified ecologist has confirmed in writing that all relevant UK and EU legislation relating to protection and enhancement of ecology has been, or will be, complied with during the design and construction process. I ask that my views are properly taken into account and given due consideration in the determination of this planning application. Please confirm receipt of this letter and keep me apprised of any developments in relation to this application. Yours faithfully,

…………………………………….

Page 4 of 4