Planning decision to be retaken

Published: Thursday 13th December 12

A planning decision for the new primary school in Putney will be retaken rather than risk any delay caused by legal action.

Wandsworth's planning applications committee will redetermine the application to build a 420-pupil primary school on the former Putney Hospital site rather than contest a legal challenge in the courts.

Opponents of the primary school queried the council's transport assessment of the development. The council had no written analysis behind its transport assessment and, while confident in that assessment, decided that fighting the legal challenge could delay the school opening beyond its 2015 target date.

Cllr Kathy Tracey, cabinet member for children's services said: "It is unfortunate that a small number of people are trying to prevent a much needed primary school being built by tying us up in litigation. Rather than have this drag out through the courts the best thing to do is simply redetermine the application in a way that deals with the bureaucratic issues raised."

The planning committee will hear the same planning application again but with written analysis to back-up its transport assessment.

A new primary school is needed to cope with rising pupil numbers.

The number of children being born in the borough each year has now topped 5,200. In 2001 this figure stood at 4,000. A new primary school is needed to meet projected demand in Putney.

If the planning permission is granted again, the new school will be run as an academy. This would make it part of the state sector but give it greater freedoms to manage its own affairs and work in partnership with other schools, academies and education establishments. 

Putney Hospital, which is situated on the eastern edge of Putney Common, closed services to patients in 1998. It has remained vacant ever since.

The planning application will seek permission to demolish the existing hospital buildings and replace them with a new primary school and 24 homes.

 View comments on this article

Comments on this news item have been closed.

If you wish to complain about a comment, contact us at

Recent comments

WBC's arrogance knows no limits. Doesn't it enter the officials' and councillors' heads that they failed twice due to numerous lies and deceptions? Had WBC behaved honourably and decently from the start, they wouldn't be in this situation. The two applications have been littered with shortcomings, lies and inaccuracies. Thamesfield councillors brushed aside the lack of a proper transport report. Cllr Ryder even assured me an EIA wasn't required. On whose side are they? If the Borough Solicitor thought WBC had a legal case he certainly wouldn't let 'a small number' of residents get in the way. It's laughable. The truth is that WBC tried to force a poorly conceived scheme through its own planning application process without following the law.
James Stuart

14 December 2012

Councillor Tracey's ridiculous comments would suggest she has learnt nothing from this fiasco of a planning application. She says it's a handful of people opposed to a school. Actually, it's a large group of people who are opposed to a MIXED development, incorporating a five storey block of flats, roads over the Common and a school with a rooftop playground. She needs to wake up and accept the errors she and the council have made - and not attempt to blame the residents for the council submitting an illegal planning application.
David Austin

14 December 2012

Now is the time for the Council to apologise and then to rethink the whole scheme, both over large schol and depressing flats, and listen to residents. Blaming residents who have got it right in a lame attempt to cover up for the Council's failure will not wash.
Nicholas Evans

13 December 2012

Cllr Tracey's comments are hysterical, instead of apologising for the deceit and lies of WBC, she chooses to blame local residents who have real and genuine concerns about these over intensive proposals. WBC's first application was unlawful, declared invalid. The planners and the PAC were told the second application was unlawful due to the lack of an EIA, but instead of taking their responsibilities seriously, they ignored them and nodded the permission through, like poodles. Wandsworth have acted in an arrogant and manipulative fashion, and their climb down today, by agreeing to quash the unlawful planning permission is the only possible outcome of ignoring the law. The Chair, Committee of the PAC and planners should be ashamed
John Cameron

13 December 2012

It is unfortunate that the planners and applicants did not foresee that the transport assessment needed to be backed with evidence. It is also unfortunate that Cllr. Tracey decides to blame, "a small number of people" and accuses them of "trying to prevent a much needed primary school being built by tying us up in litigation." Had the work been done properly in the first place there would have been no threat that this could, "drag out through the courts". The delay is clearly the fault of the council's neglect of "bureaucratic" procedures, not of the people seeking clear evidence that the school would not be a major contributor to traffic chaos.
Celia Blair

13 December 2012