Charter School ED pre-planning application consultation

[ed_pete]

Pushing this out to the wider community as I'm not sure how many would have seen the original post in the Family Room. I'd encourage anyone who has an interest in the design and architecture of local buildings to go along, regardless of whether or not you have children.

The new school will be a highly visible piece of public architecture that will hopefully be in place for many, many years so it's really important you take the opportunity to express your views.

http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?29,1578200

[Jules-and-Boo]

thank you - I'd not seen that but will definately be there !

[James Barber]

Also anyone living on Melbourne Grove, Jarvis Road or East Dulwich Grove. Big impacts with proposed school entrances, building routes, phasing.

[Curmudgeon]

Isn't this just the plans for the temporary site though?

[ed_pete]

I'm not so sure. I think some of the buildings are temporary but some will form part of the core school buildings. For example I believe that they plan to site the school sports hall/gym at the western end of the site in place of the existing buildings that were at one time (I think) hospital staff accommodation.

[James Barber]

At the last Dulwich Community council it was explained that NHS Property are relaseing two areas for the new temporary and permanent school building.

Extreme western end and NE rectangle longest side going East to West abutting Jarvis Road entrance.

The Charter chair of governors explained that they're thinking along with the Educational Finance Agency is for the sports hall to go on extreme western land being passed to them.

That the NE area will hold the temporary buildings close to Jarvis Road and the western end will have one of the main permanent blocks built.

NHS property explained they would need an extra 23 years before they vacate the bulk of the site to plan and build new health facilities. They seemed pleased with themselves to do it so quickly. This is probably when the comment I was pulling faces someone made came from. I was seriously agog it could take 4 years - after 23 years of 'planning' to build a new health centre. They're allowing 18 months to plan the thing. a couple of years to build it. All funded by a PFI arrangement - amazingly stupid way to finance any public building if you consider more than one parliament.

This obviously raises lots of questions which I'm sure we'll get resolved and flexed with meetings offered over the next few weeks.

[intexasatthe moment]

For goodness sake James stop using every issue as an opportunity to show yourself in a good light .

The reference to you pulling faces was in connection with the Melbourne Grove debate ,nothing to do with the old hospital/Charter 2 site .

Why not just give us the info regarding NHS property without using it as a means of defending yourself ?

[ed_pete]

Just to clarify, I think James meant 2-3 years not 23 years.

[spider69]

Perhaps not having learned from the NX Road fiasco

[Sunglasses]

Anybody know if the new Charter School will any playing fields?

[ed_pete]

Unlikely on the hospital site as I don't think there is sufficient space. It would be great if they could do a deal with St Saviours and St Olaves girls school given the proximity of that field on Greendale. I even think there is a tunnel under the railway line at the back of the site that could make access to the playing fields even easier.

[James Barber]

Hi ed_pete,

No. NHS Property and its predecessors between them have been planning to replace Dulwich Hospital for 23 years now and announced it will be another 4 before they complete. Even glacial would be quicker.

hi spider69,

Not sure what the NCR fiasco has to do with me other than suggesting the junction should be improved. I don't manage Southwark's chosen contractor doing the works. Or manage the people managing the contractor.

Hi Sunglasses,

We're not clear on about playing fields yet. I doubt if they did it would be grass. They will have sufficient land for sufficient outdoor space. modern astroturf would be good. They're also hoping to keep the central chateau which would be great but adding a large amount of building behind and joined to it.

[ed_pete]

James - you said "NHS property explained they would need an extra 23 years before they vacate the bulk of the site to plan and build new health facilities."

Are you seriously saying that the hospital site won't be vacated until 2038 ? No - 2019-20 at the latest which I agree is still too long given how long it has been so far.

As for keeping the central chateau - that is it not a given.

[Andrew1011]

James Barber Wrote:

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

> Hi ed_pete,

> No. NHS Property and its predecessors between them

> have been planning to replace Dulwich Hospital for

> 23 years now and announced it will be another 4

> before they complete. Even glacial would be

> quicker.

James' confusing post where he talks about 23 years reads as though he was a bit 'tired and emotional' when writing it. There was no rush and just imagine if this site had actually been developed 23 years ago when the area's needs were very different to what's required now. There was no need then for a new secondary school of course, and Kings wouldn't have been able to temporarily re-site its services at Dulwich Hospital during its rebuilding in mid-90s to the early 2000s. We'd probably have ended up with a horrible housing development of poor architectural quality, like the one next to Dulwich Hamlet FC.

> Hi Sunglasses,

> We're not clear on about playing fields yet. I

> doubt if they did it would be grass. They will

> have sufficient land for sufficient outdoor space.

> modern astroturf would be good. They're also

> hoping to keep the central chateau which would be

> great but adding a large amount of building behind

> and joined to it.

But more room for grassed open space than if someone's idiotic campaign for a Nunhead primary school on the site had succeeded, eh? Also, please try to stop yourself pre-empting the pre-planning consultation with your own preconceived ideas about what would and wouldn't be good here. You can feed into this consultation like anyone else and, in this case, the amount of land available for open space is very much in spite of you.

For your information, residents of the northern end of Melbourne Grove are organising a response to the issue of the temporary school on this road, but I suspect you already knew that before your 'Johnny come lately' post on the 24th. So also hold off on taking it to Southwark News as a front page Barber scoop.

[ed_pete]

You really don't like JB do you ? And as for slating what I presume is the Abbotswood Road estate, I not sure the residents would be so enamored with your description: "We'd probably have ended up with a horrible housing development of poor architectural poor quality, like the one next to Dulwich Hamlet FC."

[rabbitears]

James Barber Wrote:

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

> Also anyone living on Melbourne Grove, Jarvis Road

> or East Dulwich Grove. Big impacts with proposed

> school entrances, building routes, phasing.

Yeah...well...be careful what you wish for! It's a big patch of valuable real estate. KO a school (which are generally awesome to live next to) and you could end up with a much worse development.

[Andrew1011]

ed_pete Wrote:

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

> You really don't like JB do you ?

Like quite a few others here, I don't like his politics, his flip flopping, his habit of claiming credit for almost everything, or the fact that he's labelling the medical centre development a 'PFI' when he was clearly told at the last DCC that it isn't. Plus I am perfectly at liberty to express my views here, just like you frequently do.

> And as forslating what I presume is the Abbotswood Road

> estate, I not sure the residents would be so

> enamored with your description: "We'd probably

> have ended up with a horrible housing development

> of poor architectural poor quality, like the one

> next to Dulwich Hamlet FC."

My comment was about the estate's architecture/design not the people who live there. I considered buying one of the houses there in 1996 because of the position of the estate. I didn't because I wasn't 'enamoured' by the features I mentioned. No, I wouldn't like or have liked the style to proliferate in the area and I'm perfectly entitled to that opinion about an an architectural and design style, and to express it here, without attempts at nannying censure from you.

Yes, with the benefit of hindsight, I'm very glad that no development took place on the hospital site in the last 23 years and that JB's idiotic push for a primary school on the site wasn't accepted. And yes, I would like the unlisted landmark hospital replaced by two new landmark public developments of high architectural quality, rather than by a mock 1970's housing style mostly found in a Midlands dormitory town. I also don't want the development of the whole site to be rushed and I don't get JB's incredulity at the projected timescale, especially as it's very probably an extremely cautious one in order to manage expectations.

[Andrew1011]

rabbitears Wrote:

> Yeah...well...be careful what you wish for! It's a

> big patch of valuable real estate. KO a school

> (which are generally awesome to live next to) and

> you could end up with a much worse development.

Don't worry, it's already been earmarked for the school (apart from the area for the new medical centre) with the full support of the council based on assessed and evidenced future educational need. Not much could stop it now and the big local issues will be almost certainly be about style, access, parking, etc.