What's happening to old ED police station?

[Louisa]

I personally am going to miss the old derelict police building. There's something quite soothing about abandoned post-modern architecture. Leaves me feeling all cold inside.

Louisa.

[Caroline_S]

As a parent of a child at the school, it is incredibly disheartening to see a couple of pages of comments from people wringing their hands over the plans' lack of architectural merit. Yes, I agree that the look of the proposed building is pretty uninspiring, but my understanding is that they are working within a very limited budget and a small and complicated site. Frankly, if it's a choice between something architecturally interesting but expensive, and then therefore potentially small, or plain but functional and making the best use of the limited space, then I'd far rather they work towards the latter. The teaching that goes on inside is what counts.

Also, please bear in mind that the school itself is already in existence, and your comments could have a real impact on the school's plans for a smooth transfer across to their permanent site. The move has already been delayed, and it would be a great shame if it were delayed further due to local objection that the building just wasn't pretty enough.

[intexasatthe moment]

I appreciate your point of view and as a parent who only secured a place for a child at both primary and secondary several weeks after the start of term ,I know how painful it can be and how focussed on the issue one becomes .

I don't understand however why you are equating good design with an undersized school/ poor use of the site and a plain and fuctional design with good use of the plot .

The build of the school has been delayed ,I'm afraid it's not at all uncommon . The process of producing a building will involve applying for planning permission and this will allow the standard 21 days for people to formally comment . Although " good design " is a planning consideration it is only one of many ,and most of them are a good deal more objective . It is extremely unlikely that an application would be delayed because of objections merely to the look of the building .

A new school isn't just for one year's intake ,it will have an impact on many people for many years . I don't think you should trivialise people's concern about the form it will take as " hand wringing " .

[Caroline_S]

> I don't understand however why you are equating

> good design with an undersized school/ poor use of

> the site and a plain and fuctional design with

> good use of the plot .

>

I didn't mean to sound so simplistic but what I was getting at was that some suggestions above, such as using bricks and mortar or wood cladding, would be more costly. Having met the team at the consultation meeting, I had the impression that many of the design decisions were due to budgetary constraints, or due to the limitations of space. For example, I was initially dismayed that the building will be four storeys, but I am prepared to accept that this is the compromise to ensure they retain as much playground space as they can. I know that the constraints of budget or space shouldn't preclude good design but the reality is that there isn't a bottomless pit of money.

[Longshanks]

But are we having a serious discussion that will consider the viewpoints of all those concerned leading to revisions, improvements and a satisfactory outcome for all? Or is it a moaning session?

[intexasatthe moment]

Longshanks - the opportunity for serious considerations will be during the planning consultation . It doesn't really matter if people want to moan on here or not .

[Longshanks]

Okay, I'll see you all there then.

[Curmudgeon]

singalto Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I did go to the exhibition about this school as I

> had questions for them. I don't think some aspects

> have really been thought through.

> There is no parking provision at all for the staff

> as they are 'going to be encouraged to use public

> transport or cycle.' I mentioned the chaos from

> parents dropping off and collecting as I am a

> teacher and see how it works at those schools:

> parents park in drive ways, double park etc. The

> project manager told me that the parents have been

> encouraged to walk, use the bus etc and I was told

> that the parents of the children currently on the

> temporary site are happy with these plans. As the

> current site is by the Harris Girls East Dulwich,

> I don't see how the catchment area can be the same

> as for the Lordship Lane site.

>

> The building is going to be 4 floors tall with 400

> children once it is fully functioning. I am very

> uneasy about the whole project.

I simply do not understand how planning permission without adequate parking is consistently allowed to pass. As though all of a sudden there is no need for car parking space because they say they'll use public transport.

School staff do not tend to live within walking distance of where they work, although a minority do. There is always a demand for parking. So a school of 400 with what? 30 or so staff, plus catering staff and grounds staff? And no parking? That is simply going to cause a strain on the local roads.

I work in a school with insufficient staff parking and no visitor parking ...it is extremely difficult to manage. And I've seen this happen with numerous flat developments too

Cloud-cuckoo land by planning committees

[Curmudgeon]

I've just had a look at the plans ...seems a sensible use of the space. As a parent I would be concerned at the lack of outdoor play space but the site doesn't allow for more does it. They will have to stagger play times. What about deliveries of foods and supplies?

Also interesting that the bus stop appears to have disappeared on the drawings. I assume it isn't really going to be moved though is it?

[first mate]

The Parking issue is significant but some will be happy to allow pressure to build short term as it makes introduction of ED-wide CPZ much more likely- a cherished dream of certain councillors on this forum.

Imagine, the combined effects of the new school, the new cinema, and the new M&S. That is going to be a heck of a lot more traffic on one small section of Lordship Lane and surrounding streets.

[intexasatthe moment]

I agree with Curmudgeon about the parking ,it is going to be a nightmare .

I happened to be in Elsie Rd yesterday and saw all the freshly painted white H lines acroos the many ,many dropped kerbs . And the laminated signs from Goose Green Primary asking parents not to park across driveways .

I know many parents work and are driving so that they can drop child/ren off before whizzing on to somewhere else .

And the poor teachers .

[first mate]

Councillors know fine well where this is going and it is what they want. I should also have added that in the same small area we also have the weekly market and the car wash. CPZ on the way folks, job done.

[BrandNewGuy]

Curmudgeon Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> School staff do not tend to live within walking

> distance of where they work, although a minority

> do. There is always a demand for parking. So a

> school of 400 with what? 30 or so staff, plus

> catering staff and grounds staff? And no parking?

> That is simply going to cause a strain on the

> local roads.

> I work in a school with insufficient staff parking

> and no visitor parking ...it is extremely

> difficult to manage. And I've seen this happen

> with numerous flat developments too

Is it too much to expect staff to use public transport? There might be problems from parents dropping off and picking up, but that doesn't impact parking ? those pressures can be relieved by a strong commitment from schools to encourage public transport use by their staff. When the 'research' came out for the proposed CPZ near the station a few years ago, it became clear just how many local school staff were parking in nearby roads. I work for a company of about 40 where not one employee uses a car to drive to work. Why should schools be so different?

[Curmudgeon]

BrandNewGuy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Curmudgeon Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > School staff do not tend to live within walking

> > distance of where they work, although a

> minority

> > do. There is always a demand for parking. So

> a

> > school of 400 with what? 30 or so staff, plus

> > catering staff and grounds staff? And no

> parking?

> > That is simply going to cause a strain on the

> > local roads.

> > I work in a school with insufficient staff

> parking

> > and no visitor parking ...it is extremely

> > difficult to manage. And I've seen this happen

> > with numerous flat developments too

>

> Is it too much to expect staff to use public

> transport? There might be problems from parents

> dropping off and picking up, but that doesn't

> impact parking ? those pressures can be relieved

> by a strong commitment from schools to encourage

> public transport use by their staff. When the

> 'research' came out for the proposed CPZ near the

> station a few years ago, it became clear just how

> many local school staff were parking in nearby

> roads. I work for a company of about 40 where not

> one employee uses a car to drive to work. Why

> should schools be so different?

Yes it is, it's one of those PC statements we allow to pass because public transport is so easy (yeah right)

although some will of course, and others will cycle. A number will still drive

I personally drive to work - I have to be able to get there and back in time for my own children ...it takes me 10 minutes ...in order to take public transport I would have to allow an hour which my other commitments don't allow for.

That said ... People drive in London...just because you don't or have different political ideals it does not mean that you can dictate to teachers and school staff. Young teachers are hard enough to attract to the area, can they afford to live in walking distance? Would they want to live and work in the same area? Is our public transport really that good or reliable?

[BrandNewGuy]

Curmudgeon Wrote:

> Yes it is, it's one of those PC statements we

> allow to pass because public transport is so easy

> (yeah right)

It's not PC, it's a practical issue to do with the provision of parking when a major building (a school) gets placed in a largely resdiential area. Public transport is neither easy nor difficult ? you make your own priorities accordingly.

>

> That said ... People drive in London...just

> because you don't or have different political

> ideals it does not mean that you can dictate to

> teachers and school staff.

I'm not dictating, I'm just pointing out that for thousands of businesses in London there is no parking provision.

> Young teachers are

> hard enough to attract to the area, can they

> afford to live in walking distance? Would they

> want to live and work in the same area?

Young teachers aren't being 'attracted' to the area at all, as far as I know. Walking distance is not an option for the vast majority of employees in London but we all get by OK.

> Is our public transport really that good or reliable?

Yeah, usually ? we have our moans and groans, but it's a big busy city. It's not 'PC' to suggest that car driving should not take priority over all other forms of transport in London.

[LondonMix]

Agree. In central London there is virtually no parking provision. Literally two spaces per 150 employees in a typical office building.

Its not too much to expect people to commute to East Dulwich. Peckham is very well connected to lots of areas and from Peckham, you can get to Whately Road in a reasonable amount of time.

[Curmudgeon]

Well, we aren't central London and nor do we have the underground. And school staff start earlier than most office staff, generally before 8.

At my school we have staff driving in from everywhere, including Kent - the small car park starts to fill up from 6.15, by 7.30 its difficult to park. we have 130 directly employed and about 20 catering staff - we promote public transport use; have underground, 3 train stations and bus routes about a 10-15 minute walk away and we consistently have 50 cars parked (all figures are approximate) and no visitor parking.

My best guess is that you'd probably have around 10 staff cars parked on local streets, despite best intentions of "use public transport"; there will be issues with parental drop-off and pick up; deliveries and coach trip pick-ups and drop-offs will be challenging; I didn't see cycle/scooter storage (maybe I missed it) which will cut into outdoor space and I'd be interested in whether the 2 bus-stops are being moved. There will definitely be parking issues on surrounding streets.

But as with all planning applications the "use public transport" will no doubt be accepted as the solution and there will be increased pressure.

[intexasatthe moment]

I agree with Curmudgeon's last sentence .

For the teachers it's going to make a tough job even tougher if they have to rely on public transport .I've seen the amount of stuff a primary school teacher lugs in to work and believe me I wouldn't want to grapple with it on public transport .

[LondonMix]

I tend to agree that people will drive until its impossible. In Central London, the cost of driving is prohibitive and the lack of parking makes it virtually impossible which is why most people with cars still don't bother to drive to work.

People won't universally use public transport here until there is no choice but to do so in Dulwich.

[sophiesofa]

I think it's unrealistic to expect staff to all get public transport. It's easier to get into Central london than it is to go around the edges on public transport. I'm a teacher and I drive, as do about 70% of the employees (although my school is in kent). When I had an office job in Central london I got the train and tube. Yes, it would be better for the school and the locals (I live opposite the new school) if all staff walk or get public transport, but it's just not going to happen.

It's already a tight site and I don't think they should compromise the playground space. They'll just have to park on the roads, which is far from ideal.

[StraferJack]

Parents will be living much closer to the school than the staff (by and large) won't they? Seems unfair to expect the staff to take the hit

[Earl Aelfheah]

sophiesofa Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> They'll just have to park on the roads, which is far from

> ideal.

But not any different to the other primary schools in the area.

[BrandNewGuy]

But as mentioned, parents are unlilkelky to add to parking pressures, just the hassle of drop-off and pick-up. In Curmudgeon's case, a third of the staff drive to school, which is extraordinary given that "we promote public transport use". Nobody's expecting "all" staff to use public transport, but if schools can't come up with imaginative and compelling ways of actually doing something about reducing car use in crowded urban environments, the situation's unlikely to change. And the issue has got nothing to do with teachers having a "tough job".

[James Barber]

Several factors will help.

Le Garage opposite on Whateley Road has submitted a planning application to become a home - residents and businesses there will know what a positive impact on parking etc that would have if granted.

All going well this new school will becoem as popular as Heber School which doesn't seem to have a parking problem due to the much reduced admissions radius.

I suspect the biggest impact will be the School Keep Clear area on Landcroft Road. Critical for fire engines in emergencies.

NB the cycle and scooter parking is planned along the southern edge of the site. Lots of it proposed, more than any other primary school int he area.

[Penguin68]

The 'parking problem' would seem to be associated with teaching and other staff needing to access the site to work - presumably in general needing to park between, say, 7:30 and 16:30 - give or take - and the popularity of the school is irrelevant to that. The number of parking spaces taken up by the garage (4-5 normally) will at least in part be now taken by the new householders, whenever that comes about.

That end of LL is increasingly popular for shopping, eating out (cinema eventually) - the school will simply bring additional pressure to parking around there during the day in term-time - thus impacting the revenues etc. of local businesses - many of which there sell relatively heavy or bulky items for which public transport or bikes are not an ideal solution.

Clearly there are plusses about more primary provision locally, but there are also - for those without primary age children, and particularly living very locally - very many minuses.