FRANK FARMER HAS WRITTEN A RESPONSE TO THE MEETING ABOUT 'GROVELANDS PARK IMPROVEMENT PROPOSALS'
Gary Barnes, Assistant Director Regeneration, Leisure and Libraries faced a crowded, and sometimes hostile meeting of residents as he presented outline proposals by Enfield Council to build a new two-form entry primary school within Grovelands Park and the Priory Hospital grounds and other developments that would include current sporting facilities. It was clear from the outset that many of those present were angry because they had not received the invitation letter when they live close to the affected areas and had only heard that it was taking place by word-of-mouth. Of those who did receive the letter, there were complaints that many were at work at four o'clock in the afternoon and that the meeting should have been held at a more appropriate time. Mr. Barnes did not help his case by being ill-prepared and by not creating a proper structure which would have allowed a formal presentation followed by questions. In fact people were interrupting him from the start and unfortunately many of the questions and answers were missed.
Mr. Barnes was pressed on the rumour that houses were likely to be built in the grounds. He strenuously denied this and added that until English Heritage had given their approval, nothing could be progressed because the land was designated a "2-star park" designed by Repton and Morson – one of only five such parks in the country – and that English Heritage would not give its approval until it had seen an historic parks survey and a full management plan. He admitted to having been surprised that English Heritage had not dismissed the proposals 'out of hand' but acknowledged that there would be at least six month's work before such plans could be ready for submission.
Aerial pictures of the site were on view but the majority of the audience could not see them, so Mr. Barnes' comments regarding location were largely lost on the audience. Clearly, a properly thought-out presentation would have provided for wide-screen slides to be shown to allow people at the meeting to follow the points he was making regarding the likely positioning of new buildings and access to them. It was unfortunate that the meeting lacked structure because there were people present who are directly affected by the lack of school places in a borough whose population continues to increase. Others, without school-age children acknowledged that there is a need for more school places but questioned the suitability of the site. It was pointed out that Southgate College itself was likely to dispose of that part of its site which occupies some of the old Minchenden School land – ironically closed some years ago because of the lack of demand for places. Mr. Barnes could not discuss that idea. Neither was he able to tell the meeting at what stage the negotiations have reached with Thames Water or what the likely cost of that land would be. He did say, however, that the proposed school would be 'built underground' – something that caused a certain amount of puzzlement among the audience. He also said that any such school would have to be built under the Government's 'Free School' programme but he didn't explain the ramifications of such an idea.
Many people expressed their concern that the proposed school would be adjacent to the Priory Hospital which provides in-patient care for people with drug and alcohol problems. Mr. Barnes assured the meeting that all schools have security systems in place but one regular user of the park insisted that patients did enter the park and had been known to insult members of the public and cause a nuisance. Others questioned access, a possible new road leading into the grounds and likely increased traffic problems. Mr. Barnes said that a traffic survey and report could not be undertaken until the main plans were approved.
All in all, this was an unsatisfactory meeting. It did little to resolve genuine concerns of local residents and even parents of likely pupils at the proposed new school were unclear as to the likelihood of it ever being opened. But Mr. Barnes and his colleagues from Enfield Council would have been left in no doubt that they have a hard task ahead of them to convince the majority of local residents that this is a workable and acceptable idea. We will await further developments and various 'action groups' look ready to respond, so it will be interesting. Certainly the Council should now be aware that they cannot ignore seriously held concern among the very people who pay their wages and elect them!
Frank Farmer 19.7.13
Comments