I READ with interest your article 'Stunning outdoor classroom plans for Egerton primary school revealed’, written by your politics reporter, Daniel Holland, on January 10.

The ‘forest school’ appears to be just an add-on to a large development in green belt.

The area in question has already been significantly developed over the past 12 years since the elderly farmer died.

The building will certainly impact on the openness of the greenbelt.

In fact, the current proposal highlights that, unlike the earlier proposal, this two-storey scheme would be visually evident from the Longworth Road frontage which would detract from the rural landscape that currently separates Lower and Upper Critchley Farms.

Looking across from Scout Road, it is clear that many outbuildings have already been developed into housing and stables.

If yet more development was allowed on this land it would undoubtedly create an area of urban sprawl rather than greenbelt. Where does it stop?

I am also very sceptical about the motivation to build a forest school.

Having spoken to parents of children at Egerton Primary School I am under the impression that the school already an outdoor forest area.

Maybe the parents should request a trail walk down from the school to the proposed location so they can judge for themselves the safeness of the walk and the distinct lack of pavements.

I find it quite ironic that your paper reported in October, 2013, that the same school had banned running in the playground and yet it will allow pupils to walk along a road with little or no pavements, across a bridge with just a speed barrier, around a blind bend which is so close to the national speed limit.

I also note that the school has recently applied for planning permission to build a 2.4m high wall around the school to protect the children.

Another major concern for this rural area is that trees were cut down between Longworth Road and Stones Bank Road, on the road between Darwen and Egerton, which have wooded areas on each side notorious for anti-social activity.

A new wooded area would surely be ill-advised as it may encourage this activity only a few yards down the road?

Who will be managing or policing this ‘forest' area? Will public toilets be built?

Should this area be surrounded by a huge fence to keep out the general public during darkness hours?

That would certainly impact the greenbelt. It sounds like it would be more work for the already overstretched police/council.

This is the third application for a similar build.

The council has already recommended refusal for two applications, as the officer commented it was inappropriate development and harmful to the greenbelt.

There are no special circumstances in this new application, nor do I accept that it is so unique that this design could not be replicated elsewhere beyond the boundaries of green belt.

Name and address supplied