‘Waking up to a nightmare’ – parents and residents’ fight against Sheffield school’s new MUGA

Sheffield City Council’s planning committee will soon discuss Ecclesall Primary School’s proposal to construct a second, even larger MUGA on its grounds.

As the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS) reported last year, the prospect of a new MUGA attracted attention when children and parents staged a peaceful protest in front of the school.

Concerns raised by protesters at the time included drainage, flooding, and the potential loss of biodiversity. However, the planning committee deferred its decision, asking for a representative from the Lead Local Flood Authority to attend a future meeting and address councillors’ concerns.

That meeting is now scheduled for today (April 29), and the group is doing everything they can to convince the committee – and the public – of the dangers of building a new MUGA.

Ann Blanchflower, a resident living close to the school, told the LDRS that while the matter had been deferred due to drainage concerns last year, “practically nothing has happened since then openly and transparently”.

She said: “Behind the scenes, it looks as though they might have been looking at the drainage a bit – there is one new drainage drawing and a two-page thing strategy on the planning portal but absolutely no new detail whatsoever as statistics.”

Tessa Lupton, another member of the group, added they have not had any further communication from the school. Ms Lupton said a large group of parents and residents are simply left waiting to see what happens next.

Despite the group’s ongoing protests, officers have recommended approving the new MUGA. Councillors typically follow these recommendations – raising the question: what can be done now?

Ms Lupton said that in the past few days, Sheffield Council launched a new initiative called “Built For Change”, offering guidance and support to schools preparing for climate change.

“It’s quite ironic, really, that we’re talking about this proposal that’s going to take away this big natural space where children can plan freely,” she said.

She also said it should be taken into consideration that, during a climate emergency, children should play on natural surfaces rather than artificial ones.

Ms Blanchflower noted that although officers recommended approval, councillors at the last meeting appeared to be actively looking for a planning reason to reject the proposal, given the strength of opposition.

Umberto Albarella, a local resident whose daughter once attended the school, said that at the previous meeting, the council’s officer had been so isolated in their view that the application should go ahead, councillors decided to postpone the decision.

Mr Albarella said: “We are here to represent our community. We can’t wait for the politicians to do the work for us. It’s our moral responsibility to defend the community to ensure it remains a cohesive community.”

He stressed that staying quiet would only allow things to get worse and reassured residents that, whatever the outcome of the meeting, the group would continue to oppose any actions that threaten the broader community and their children’s future.

Photos have also circulated showing parts of the school grounds taped off “like some sort of crime scene” near the astro-turf and the existing MUGA.

Laura Leek, another parent, said the existing MUGA was installed when the school expanded, so the proposed new MUGA is “not a new facility for children to use”.

“There is already one there. This is an additional one replacing something that is a natural resource and a barrier for flooding,” Ms Leek added.

Ms Leek said her daughter, who is in Year 6, had not been consulted about the plans. She said the school “doesn’t want children to discuss it,” even though it would impact their time there.

Another major concern for Ms Leek is safety, especially for girls like her daughter, Jazz, who don’t feel safe in the MUGA.

In a written statement seen by the LDRS, Jazz described an incident:

“On Fridays, girls get to play in the MUGA (girls only). We don’t go in on the other days because the boys belt the ball really hard at you.

“Sometimes the boys stand on the edge and watch. On Friday afternoon break, they stood outside and started chanting ‘we want our MUGA back’. We tried to ignore them but then they came into the MUGA and started whacking footballs at a few of the girls including me.

“It made me feel like I don’t want to go in there again. If they make another MUGA, I don’t think I’d feel safe going in there either. Boys still had the chance to play football on Friday on the field but they chose to stand and chant at us instead.”

Ms Leek said communication between the school and parents regarding concerns about the MUGA has been poor because the school “doesn’t want to hear any form of opposition,” describing the situation as an “odd dynamic”.

She added that if they had been asked, parents could have offered alternative ideas that would work for everyone.

One such idea involves better maintaining the existing field, including:

Aerating the soil to improve quality and drainage

Adding sand if necessary to enhance drainage and durability

Reducing usage of damaged areas to allow recovery

Fertilising the field

Levelling worn patches to prevent further damage

Seeding overused areas and allowing them time to rest

Top dressing areas where needed

Ms Lupton said that as a parent, she feels disappointed that a large open space where children can run freely, do cartwheels, dig in the dirt, build bug hotels, and use their imaginations could soon be lost.

She emphasised that the group is not against P.E.; they simply want the school to maintain existing facilities and protect the natural environment.

“When we first saw or heard about this, that they were going to take the field away, it was literally like waking up to a nightmare and I still now can’t believe that we’re in this situation,” Ms Lupton added.

The group stressed they “never feel great about criticising the school” and that no one wants to be in this position. However, they believe it is vital to speak up for those who cannot, given how important the issue is to so many.

A final decision will be made by Sheffield Council’s planning committee on Tuesday (April 29) at 2pm.