Floodlights planning application on Alleyns astro turf pitch

[murphy]

The current application is lights up until 6.30pm, however the original planning application included floodlights in use until 10pm. They got the planning application through on condition they dropped the floodlights.

So a bit of time elapses and Alleyn's then apply for floodlights,

So a bit more time elapses and they ask to extend the use of lights to 8,9, or 10pm perhaps?

Why should we believe it will be limited to 6.30 when experience shows us that Alleyn's will bide their time and come back at a later date to get what they really want. This is not the only time Alleyn's have got planning permission through promising one thing and then at a later date tried to get certain conditions that were imposed reversed.

Huguenot - 8x15m high floodlights are not quite the same as a streetlamp.

[DJKillaQueen]

But a variation of license would require a new application and can be objected to. Objecting to 6.30 because you believe that Alleyns will the then make further applications to change the operating hours will not be considered as a valid objection I'm afraid.

[BrandNewGuy]

murphy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So a bit more time elapses and they ask to extend

> the use of lights to 8,9, or 10pm perhaps?

>

> Why should we believe it will be limited to 6.30

> when experience shows us that Alleyn's will bide

> their time and come back at a later date to get

> what they really want. This is not the only time

> Alleyn's have got planning permission through

> promising one thing and then at a later date tried

> to get certain conditions that were imposed

> reversed.

In which case, object to it at that point - I can't see the council taking on board an objection that doesn't refer to the details of the current application. But perhaps it's worth replying to the consultation emphasising the importance of the 6.30 'switch-off'.

[murphy]

DJKillaQueen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> But a variation of license would require a new

> application and can be objected to. Objecting to

> 6.30 because you believe that Alleyns will the

> then make further applications to change the

> operating hours will not be considered as a valid

> objection I'm afraid.

Exactly, the original planning application was granted on condition of no floodlights, now they have come back asking for floodlights, so residents are objecting mainly on the grounds on light and noise pollution as they did with the original application.

We are not objecting on the grounds that hours may be extended at some point in the future, simply stating the case that as on previous applications they are likely to ask for more at a future date, when they do we will object to that as well.

If the pitch was hidden away and had no effect on houses we would not be objecting. For example where the JAGS floodlit pitch is sited is pretty good, with a large amount on the light being blocked out by the Charter School and JAGS school buildings, although even there I am sure it probably impacts on the houses on Nairne Grove.

[Huguenot]

It seems to me that the cut-off point at 6.30pm is key.

A claim for 'light pollution' or 'noise pollution' before 6.30pm is absolutely extraordinary in its intolerance.

I'm not sure anything before 8pm wouldn't be similarly unreasonable.

[DJKillaQueen]

I tend to agree that light and low level noise pollution before 6.30 is reasonable...esp with regards to a school that needs pitches it's pupils can play on all year round.

[bob]

It won't stop there so they will rent it out after 6.30 to re coup the mony that they have spent

Bob S

[DJKillaQueen]

But they will need to apply for a variation of licence before they can do that to which you can object. It not grounds to object to 6.30 because you think they'll apply for a later licence later on.

[Huguenot]

There will also be precedent on the pre 6.30pm noise pollution since they undoubtedly play outdoor sports there until that time in the summer.

[DJKillaQueen]

Exactly H. If you live next to a school there will be school noise. Sports don't generate that much noise anyway bar the odd cheer or referees whistle. And many parents who work are not home before that time. Obviously after 6.30 and into the evening the situation changes but the application isn't for that.

[bob]

How can you say low level light is ok it has to be very very bright or it will not do it's job this is all just a sprat to catch much bigger fish.

Bob S

[BrandNewGuy]

Bob, if they apply to extend the time to 8pm or 10pm, I'll object, OK?

[camberwellbeauty]

Grumpydad .... your post makes me wonder why you bought a house overlooking a school?? Surely noise from children / sport was a given?

[EDfor]

THE WHOLE POINT ABOUT THIS PLANNING APPLICATION IS THAT IT IS NEW & ADDITIONAL LIGHT & THE FLOODLIGHTS WILL BE A SERIOUS EYESORE IN A RESIDENTIAL & CONSERVATION AREA !!

so many of these postings seem to be from people who think the school can do what it wants when really it is just an educational business that has little or no relationship with its community, protects itself behind iron bars with security guards and cctv & is already flooded with needless light like a goods yard

There is still time to object,today's the last day for formal submissions - e-mail is fine - but there is still time to raise it with your councillors....

[DJKillaQueen]

And others see it as a school looking to extend the range of facilities it's pupils can use in the winter months.

[Huguenot]

It doesn't appear to have much environmental impact physically. The light stands are tiny.

It's only illumninated until 6.30, so hardly an eyesore.

I certainly don't think the school can do what it wants, instead I think this is an overreaction on behalf of some people based on rumour and incorrrect information, and some sort of worry about a nebulous futurecrime.

On that basis I think the school's request isn't unreasonable. I like schools, I look sports, and I like schools to be able to provide sports facilities. It's great for our society.

[jiqian]

we sell wedding dress

[James Barber]

The deadline for emails or letters objecting or supporting this planning application is today 12 April BUT objectors or supporters views after today will still be accepted it just makes it ever harder for them to be taken into consideration and reach the final officer report. If 3 ojections are received the application will be decided by a planning committee.

I also think it a shame the school is more gated than in the past but with child protection issues being more prominent this is hardly surprising or avoidable. The large number of homes backing onto the school will also be safer as a result of the school being more secure.

[EDfor]

this is a real Lib Dem flight of fancy -

child safety issues exist outside the school& Alleyn's cannot/should not insulate itself from its community

the gates have absolutely nothing to do with protecting those home around the school - indeed it has been those householders which have raised the alarms and protected the school when it was being vandalised/ burgled

if you want to know what floodlights do - go to Dulwich Hamlet of an evening match or practice - go to the all weather hockey pitch near The Oval/ New Camberwell Road

15 metre floodlights are serious structures

[murphy]

There are way more than 3 objections already in from local residents,

Huguenot you can email in your support but address, Singapore, is unlikely to sway many on the council.

DJKillaQueen you can email your support from Peckham. As an enthusiastic supporter of extra sporting activities for schoolchildren and seemingly in favour of Metropolitan Open Land being built over and having floodlights, perhaps you want to reconsider your local position. When it was suggested that Harris Boys might be allowed to set foot into Peckham Rye Park and use the exisiting sports facilities and pitches, you seemed outraged by the fact. You also criticised people for daring to go back on previously agreed planning applications (a bit like Alleyn's are doing) and suggested the kids be sent to Burgess Park to play sport.

In light of your conversion I look forward to your wholehearted support if Harris Boys suggest investing in new changing facilities in the park and a floodlit astroturf pitch which the all the community could benefit from every day of the year.

Or maybe, just maybe, local residents have a bit more local backgound and knowledge about their own area and previous planning applications.

[DJKillaQueen]

It really riles me Murphy when people put words in my mouth like 'seemingly in favour of Metropolitan Open Land being built over and havig floodlights'. For the record the kind of floodlights needed to light a small astro turf are not the same as those needed to light a full sized football pitch for league matches like those at DH. And no I wouldn;t be bothered by floodlights shining down onto a pitch until 6.30pm. 10pm yes, but 6.30 no.

6.30 is not an unreasonable time. At worst it means the lights being used for 90 minutes for a couple of months during midwinter. It's a school.

And btw, Harris Boys School don't have room for exterior sporting facilites so bit of a null point don't you think?

Alleyns originally applied for something more and were rejected (for good reason). They have modified to make a new application. It's my view that the new application is not unreasonable. You disagree which is your right but you are never going to convince me otherwise and as many people would agree with my view as they do yours. Embellishing your argument with irrelevant examples such as comparison with th elighting at DH's league stadium and belittling H for even posting is not going to help your argument with the planning committee I'm afraid. They will decide what's reasonable...not you or I.

[James Barber]

When I hear which planning committee this planning application will be decided by i'll post it here.

The floodlighting is proposed to be 15m, the application explains that the hockey pitch is about 1.5m below road level. Whether 13.4M of 15m still tall.

The previous application was withdrawn by the applicant - they were told they needed a bat survey, etc, which they've included in this application.

Hi EDfor,

All schools now have dramatically different perimeter and access arrangements eg. door intercomms than a decade ago. All stems from mad machete man savagely attacking kids and staff at a nursery.

So not sure why you think this a Lib Dem flight of fancy.

[DJKillaQueen]

I stand corrected James...they withdrew the application.

[Huguenot]

Extordinary hyperbole from both EDfor and Murphy.

At least EDfor tried to keep his/her observations somewhat to the issue itself, whereas Murphy launched into flights of fancy and personal attacks.

To remind us all, this is a question of lighting on an existing all weather surface to 6.30pm on winter nights only.

Most of you won't even be home from work by then.

There have been extended surveys into light pollution that at 1-2 lux is decidedly unthreatening.

The rest of the time the lighting columns are barely visible through the treeline.

It's hardly Dulwich Hamlet football ground is it??

The response has been a catalogue of unrelated greivances and misinformation. I trust the council will take the only reasonable conclusion that the complaints are weak and the benefits to the children paramount.

[murphy]

DJ/Huguenot

I wasn't aware of any personal attacks, just what I saw as an inconsitency over DJ's views of its OK for more development at Alleyn's to help the schoolkids but serious objections to any use of Peckham Rye for schoolkids.

DJ you are right, Harris Boys don't have room for exterior sports facilities, so in future will you be supporting any application from Harris Boys to use the sports facilities at Peckham Park as happens in many other local authorities?

Er, I have not gone into flights of fancy or embellished my argument with the irrelevant example of a comparison with the lighting at DH league stadium, I specifically mentioned the astroturf behind it.

The planning committee will indeed decide and not you, however me - and other residents - will be listened to, although I guess like previous Alleyn's applications which have see them eat into Metropolitan Open Land the floodlights will be approved.

Most residents love living near the school, love the noise of kids playing sport in the evenings and at weekends, more than happy for them to have firework displays, events in the grounds etc - they live near a school and expect noise, development and some changes over the years.

What I don't love, and you only know this if you are a resident, is Alleyn's:

eating into Metropolitan Open Land for development

getting planning permission for a large new gym saying how 1,000 plus local residents who were sports club members would benefit - then closing the sports club facilities for local residents - and giving a tiny notice period that adversely affected many clubs and societies that had bee using the facilities for years

attempts to turn a playground into a car park - which the long suffering residents of Hillsboro Road had to fight

getting planning permission for a major junior school extension on the grounds that they closed the Lytcott Road entrance - only for them to come back a few years later attempting to open it again

getting planning permission for the astro turf on the basis on no floodlights, only for them to come back again a few years later asking for floodlights

So you see to someone outside the area its "floodlights until 6.30, what's the problem? 1-2 lux, that's nothing". No doubt the planning committee view it the same way and most of the previous history is irrelevant to the application so it will go through.

For many local resident thought it's about more than floodlights until 6.30. It's about Alleyn's lack of honesty over many years about planning decisions. If they had shown more honesty in the past perhaps residents might believe a pledge to only have floodlights until 6.30 but you just know 2,3 5 years, they will be back asking for more time for fllodlights or another slice of MOL land to develop.