EDUCATION
This is a guide to submitting an effective objection to the Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) for the Land East of Gamston and North of Tollerton. It focuses on Education provision, which is a key Material Planning Consideration.
Scroll down for the ‘How to structure your objection’ guide!
Why Education Provision Matters
A development of 4,000 dwellings will generate a significant increase in demand for school places. According to Department for Education (DfE) guidance and Nottinghamshire County Council (NCC), this will require:
- 3 new schools (2 primary, 1 secondary with sixth form)
- SEND provision integrated into mainstream settings
- Safe walking and cycling routes to schools
- Defined catchment areas
- Funding mechanisms via Section 106 or CIL
Without robust planning, future residents may face overcrowded schools, unsafe access routes, and inadequate support for children with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND).
Concerns with the SPD
The SPD mentions education provision but fails to provide a viable or deliverable plan. Key concerns include:
No confirmed funding: NCC and DfE have no budget allocated for the proposed schools. Delivery relies entirely on developer contributions, which may be insufficient or delayed
No demographic evidence: The SPD does not present population or age-profile data to justify the scale of provision
Undefined catchment areas: There is no clarity on which communities the new schools will serve, raising concerns about accessibility and equity
Unsafe school location: Proposed secondary school is west of Tollerton Lane, a road expected to carry traffic from 4,400 dwellings and industrial vehicles – as well as being over the A52 (with no bridge) for students from Gamston. This contradicts SPD Section 1.43 (walkable facilities) and poses safety risks
No traffic assessments: There are no transport or traffic impact assessments for the three schools, despite their potential to generate significant daily movement
Rushcliffe School overspill: SPD Section 3.40 references Rushcliffe School, which is oversubscribed. It is unclear whether the new secondary school is intended to absorb overspill pupils
Inconsistent SEND provision: The SPD refers vaguely to “possibility” of SEN provision, with no commitment to on-site facilities or alignment with NCC’s SEND Sufficiency Strategy
How to Structure Your Objection
Use your own words, but try to include the following elements:
1. Quote the SPD
Refer to:
- Section 1.43 (walkable access to schools)
- Section 3.40 (Rushcliffe School oversubscription)
- Section 4.25 (location of secondary school)
- Section B (Infrastructure) – vague references to SEND provision
2. Highlight the Gaps
Explain that the SPD lacks:
– A funded delivery plan for three schools
– Demographic justification for school numbers
– Defined catchment areas
– Safe access routes and traffic assessments
– Clear, on-site SEND provision aligned with statutory guidance
3. Explain the Risks
Say why this matters:
Schools may not be built or may be delayed
Children may face overcrowded or unsafe learning environments
SEND pupils may be excluded or underserved
The SPD is not deliverable or legally compliant
4. Refer to Planning Policy
Mention:
NPPF Paragraph 95 – requires sufficient school places and proactive collaboration
DfE Guidance on Developer Contributions (2023) – calls for early planning, land safeguarding, and capacity assessments
SEND and AP Improvement Plan (2023) – sets standards for inclusive, accessible education
SEND Code of Practice (0–25 years) – statutory framework for SEND provision
5. Request Specific Changes
You could ask for:
- A detailed education delivery plan with funding and phasing
- Demographic evidence to justify school numbers
- Defined catchment areas and safe access routes
- Traffic and transport assessments for all school sites
- Explicit commitment to on-site SEND provision aligned with NCC’s SEND Sufficiency Strategy
Example Phrases for Reference
Please do adapt these into your own words:
“The SPD does not provide a viable or deliverable plan for education provision.”
“There is no evidence of funding or demographic justification for three new schools.”
“The proposed secondary school location poses safety risks for children.”
“The SPD fails to meet statutory requirements for SEND provision.”
Where to Send Your Objection:
Send your comments to Rushcliffe Borough Council at: localdevelopment@rushcliffe.gov.uk