Here we go again...
HUGELY controversial plans to build an academy school on green space are likely to be resubmitted, despite being thrown out by councillors following more than 1,000 objections.
Stoke-on-Trent City Council's development management committee yesterday refused outline planning permission for the proposed 20:20 Discovery Academy, at Springfield, off Anchor Road, Adderley Green.
It came after families united to fight the plans, highlighting how it could rob them of public open space, lead to pupils walking along dangerous roads to get to school, and create traffic chaos.
But The Sentinel understands officials behind the academy proposals are still intent on using the Adderley Green site and could now either lodge an appeal, or submit a revised planning application to build on the same land.
It could set them on a collision course with the Government because both Schools Secretary Ed Balls and his deputy, Vernon Coaker, are due to visit Stoke-on-Trent next month to see a range of possible school sites.
Stoke-on-Trent Central MP Mark Fisher, who is arranging the visit with fellow MP Rob Flello, said the ministers were keen to sign off on the city's £250 million Building Schools for the Future programme.
He added: "Ministers want to approve the programme, but they want to approve something that has the support of the community. They are going to come here with an open mind."
The 20:20 Discovery Academy, sponsored by Stoke-on-Trent College, is one of five academies planned under the BSF scheme. It would replace Mitchell Business and Enterprise College, in Bucknall, and Edensor Technology College, in Longton.
Although central Government is funding them, the decision over which sites are used is down to the city council. Mr Balls can just offer advice to the local authority.
Yesterday's application was the final piece in the BSF jigsaw, as six other planning applications for new or extended schools have already been approved.
Andy Maskery, pictured, chairman of the Springfield Action Group, said: "It's fantastic the committee has thrown it out. But we've got to stay vigilant because they could appeal. We've never been against the school, just the location."
Margaret Lowe, who chairs another group set up by residents in Bentilee, Bucknall and Abbey Hulton, also welcomed the committee's decision.
The Community School Action Group has been fighting for a new school to replace Mitchell and Berry Hill High, rather than link Mitchell with Edensor.
Mrs Lowe said: "I'm delighted. We're now going to push to get the new school on the Mitchell site."
A city council spokesman said they were "disappointed", but would be taking the committee's comments on board and revising their plans.
He added: "We still believe this is the best site for the 20:20 Academy, both educationally and practically, as it is best placed for the communities it will serve. This is the best value for money site."
See Page 18











4 Comments
by Nicky, Community Schools Action Group
Saturday, December 12 2009, 10:49PM
“"Ministers want to approve the programme, but they want to approve something that has the support of the community." Absolutely, let's hope so, look forward to their visit. They should see the Mitchell site and realise it is 'in the heart of the community' as BSF itself recommends schools should be!
Council spokesman: "this is the best site for the 20:20 Academy, both educationally and practically, as it is best placed for the communities it will serve" - tosh! How can it be when it failed the council's own feasibility study. ELECTED councillors on the Development Management Committee were right to refuse this planning application.”
by craig, Adderley " STILL" Green
Friday, December 11 2009, 12:46PM
“This council is a waste of our money they dont listen ( well some depts do ) and when they lose they still try to fight us. EVERYONE knows whats best for all communities and the children except them. WE WILL CARRY ON TILL THEY FINALLY RELEASE HOW WRONG THEY ARE”
by gaz, bradwell
Thursday, December 10 2009, 8:29PM
“The only people gaining anything from this fiasco are the legal teams. All the money for this project will be used up paying them. I suspect that is why they chose sites that will be controversial. Keeps em in work. Schools are the goverments responsability, and they appear to be farming this out to buisnesses who have their own private agenda. MAKING MONEY for SHAREHOLDERS. No good will come of these academies, and the bribes of free uniforms and computers are only sweeteners to get their way.”
by Gary Elsby, Baddeley Green
Thursday, December 10 2009, 1:11PM
“How is the Springfields site, 'best valur for money'?
One school is built and three come down.
Whatever the equation, that is the result.
The Mitchell action group have the best moral argument in this dispute.
They have always wanted to merge their two schools into a new new one in an educational and socially deprived area.
Very practical based on sound judgements.”