Bishop Thomas Grant School Rough

Diary of a threatened wood.
04/26: Lambeth conditionally approved school's plan: fell 75% of woodland on their land for sports pitch. Quotes from consultation.

[Bishop Thomas Grant School Rough @BTGRough]

The current state of the woodland, and the intended development. The extent of the proposed tree removal is clearly visualised in the map for the ‘Tree Protection Plan’ (yes, really) 1/2

[Bishop Thomas Grant School Rough @BTGRough]

Bird calls detected beside the BTG Rough woodland throughout June, including red and amber listed #songthrush #housesparrow #dunnock #commonswift #sparrowhawk

[Bishop Thomas Grant School Rough @BTGRough]

Tuesday June 30th: a common woodpigeon and a great spotted woodpecker visiting a neighbouring garden. The woodpigeons like to gather on one of the mature oaks in the Rough due to be felled to make way for an artificial sports pitch.

[Bishop Thomas Grant School Rough @BTGRough]

...importing soils. Far from paying for properly screened aggregate and soils, it appears that the school could sleepwalk into running a waste disposal site.”

[Bishop Thomas Grant School Rough @BTGRough]

“The school has not secured funds for the proposal, which involves importing 25000m3 of soils (Design and Access statement). Residents are extremely concerned about statements made in Appendix 5 of the application, where the school states that it intends to raise funds by...

[Bishop Thomas Grant School Rough @BTGRough]

“The application results in significant, inadequately assessed harm to biodiversity, residential amenity, landscape character, and flood safety, while relying on uncertain, post-permission mitigation.”

[Bishop Thomas Grant School Rough @BTGRough]

Just a few bat calls detected from a garden on the north side of the woods tonight. A Common pipistrelle, maybe.

[Bishop Thomas Grant School Rough @BTGRough]

Lambeth Council: We approve the proposal to cut down 22 trees, clear the land, and re-grade the slope with 20,000m3 of imported soils, but we won't check for the presence of stag beetle larvae because that would be destructive.

[Bishop Thomas Grant School Rough @BTGRough]

“The school has not conducted any meaningful consultation on alternatives with residents - only one presentation Q&A session two years ago.” #SW16

[Bishop Thomas Grant School Rough @BTGRough]

...by a hydrologist. The likely conclusion would be that the attenuation pond is woefully inadequate and undersized and could increase flooding to homes downhill.”

[Bishop Thomas Grant School Rough @BTGRough]

“The hill on which the school sits is unstable and due to the clay geology prone to seasonal springs and significant ground movement. This results in significant fluctuations in run off volumes and such a scenario should be properly modelled...

[Bishop Thomas Grant School Rough @BTGRough]

“It's very hard to take seriously proposals such as low traffic neighbourhoods, which are taken forward on the grounds of tackling air pollution, whilst at the same time cutting down a woodland.”

[Bishop Thomas Grant School Rough @BTGRough]

Residents: Another reason to keep the woods—there are bats.
Council: You see garden bat activity because the woods are in a poor state. Also, we can’t see woodland bat activity because it’s tricky to look there.

[Bishop Thomas Grant School Rough @BTGRough]

...resilience of SuDS features, particularly where residents already experience runoff and where the development would reshape slopes and concentrate flows.” #streatham #floodrisk

[Bishop Thomas Grant School Rough @BTGRough]

“The applicant's repeated deferral of key controls to post-permission stages is inadequate for a site within a Critical Drainage Area. The acceptability of the scheme depends on long-term function, maintenance and...

[Bishop Thomas Grant School Rough @BTGRough]

...does not override SINC protection. Less harmful alternatives have not been properly explored.”

[Bishop Thomas Grant School Rough @BTGRough]

“The scheme involves extensive woodland loss (c.75%) without demonstrating that harm has been avoided or minimised. The claimed Biodiversity Net Gain (13.41%) is unreliable, dependent on long-term assumptions, and...

[Bishop Thomas Grant School Rough @BTGRough]

“The woodland is a wildlife haven partly because it is overgrown after decades of neglect by the school/landowner, so why should we be confident that they will diligently manage the trees on the redeveloped site from now on?”

[Bishop Thomas Grant School Rough @BTGRough]

“This proposal is ill-conceived, environmentally damaging, and profoundly disruptive to the lives of local families. It fails to meet planning policy standards for ecological protection, flood risk, and community consultation.”

[Bishop Thomas Grant School Rough @BTGRough]

Thursday, June 4th - 12.30pm

[Bishop Thomas Grant School Rough @BTGRough]

But as with this sad example reported in the Guardian today, where a colony of swifts was destroyed, that requires strong third-party oversight. Will Lambeth be interested? 3/3 https://t.co/cBTAE9TNRy

[Bishop Thomas Grant School Rough @BTGRough]

Do you see any contradictions here? The school proposes:
-Construction work over 8-12 weeks
-During the school summer holidays
-After the bird nesting season (Mar 1-Aug 31) 1/3

[Bishop Thomas Grant School Rough @BTGRough]

Local objectors: You can’t approve a plan to clear woodland during the bird nesting season.
Lambeth Council planning officer: Yes we can, if the applicant has an ecological advisor guiding it. 2/3