Browse Sections

• Education
• Special reports

Row erupts over school planning application

Jennifer Williams
13/ 2/2008

A BITTER row between Hillcrest Grammar School and Davenport and Cale Green councillors has escalated in the run-up to a crucial planning decision.

The school last week accused the Council’s Victoria Area Committee of bias in dealing with its long-running planning application, leading to a rare decision by planning officers to bypass the committee altogether.

Hillcrest felt that Davenport and Cale Green councillors had been prejudiced by meeting objectors to its proposed two-storey extension, and that other members of the Victoria committee had been similarly swayed.

Several of those councillors also sit on the Planning and Highways Committee, which will decide the application instead tomorrow (Thursday).

But in a new twist they have withdrawn from this week’s vote too under threat of legal action by the school.

Davenport and Cale Green councillors are fuming that the decision will now be taken by planning committee councillors who do not represent Cale Green or the surrounding Victoria area.

Councillor David White said: “If the applicant is in a campaign to make sure representatives of the local area aren’t allowed to take a decision, you have to ask why that is happening.”

He added: “I will not apologise for meeting with residents - the meetings I have had with residents have been the normal meetings for that area.

Fellow Victoria councillor Sue Derbyshire, who has also withdrawn from the vote, told the Express she had never been before subjected to so much lobbying on a planning application, adding: “I don‘t believe I have pre-judged, but it’s very difficult to prove a negative.”

But the school stood by its conduct and insisted the councillors were biased - adding that since they originally received outline planning permission nearly two years ago, they have strong grounds for appeal.

Headteacher David Blackburn said: “We have responded professionally to what have often been over-emotional, inaccurate objections which do not relate to the planning process.

“We have been advised that we are extremely likely to win on appeal with the costs of such a lengthy process then having to be met by the Stockport ratepayer.

”It would not only be a waste of time and money if we were forced to go to appeal.”