Harris Academy (new boys school for East Dulwich)

[the-e-dealer]

Just because it is a School - (and perhaps beause it is a Public Building)

it doesnt mean that it shouldnt be an attractive and sympathetic buillding

when possible. As for parking you need to be practical of course those teachers

not lucky enough to get in the small car park will need somewhere to park

and other seemingly minor details like how do refuse vehicles get in and out?

are quite important. A building like this is going to need a lot of services

and we have to make sure they are all there. Thats why its called planning.

[Ko]

A consultative planning process is a good idea because it lets everyone have their say.

[DaveR]

Michael, if you prefer schools to be accountable, why prefer a community school to a foundation, where, as you say, parents have more control?

The NUT is concerned with the interests of teachers, not pupils, and has consistently opposed any measure to make it's own staff accountable. Further, the persistent failure of LEA controlled schools to provide a decent standard of education to inner city kids is the reason we're in this position in the first place.

[BigDad]

Reminder - the planning application from Harris has been submitted and the clock is ticking - please check out the plans at: http://www.edge-campaign.co.uk/

Take a look at the plans - remember how much money was spent on redoing Peckham Rye? Well - fancy having this monstrosity on your doorstep! I have not heard anyone yet who is impressed by what the architects have produced.

On a more serious note - there are no windows on 2 sides of the building and the classroom windows are small, few and far between, the playground is minute - what space will they have to let off steam? look at the low quality building materials, the size and scale of the building is just so wrong.

There are details of how you can object on the EDGE site. Make sure that our kids do not get lumbered with this poorly designed school that we will have to live with for a very long time to come!

[the-e-dealer]

Hi , Anyone know the Spec for Heber's School Uniform ? No its not on Their Website!

Sorry wrong Thread!

[BigDad]

I forgot to say - the deadline for the council office to receive objections to the plans is July 18th.

Write to:

Gwilym Jones, Planning Control, Chiltern, Portland Street, London, SE17 2ES Tel: 020 7525 1137

Quote reference: Planning No. 07-AP-1431

[macroban]

Thank you to whoever uploaded the complete set of planing documentation.

The Cundall document is interesting in the way it aggregates data for both the Girls' and Boys' Academies in the submission for the Boys' Academy only. Disaggregation would be more appropriate and might produce different results. Also of note is the Eastward bias in the selection of residental streets for the "consultation". Ivydale Road is affected by the Peckham Rye site? In my view, the presentation of distorted data invalidates this document for planning application purposes.

Also of interest is the explicit mapping of the catchment area which includes SE23.

The Colin Buchanan document has the "Magical Wednesday" effect. Were less "useful" surveys done on other weekdays? The matter of school coaches has also been omitted (unless I missed it).

I have previously posted an URL referencing the planning considerations that are likely to be applied to this site. These considerations are largely subjective matters of opinion. It seems that Southwark has already formed its opinion. There has even been an allegation of a "done deal" that will pre-empt the decision.

In my opinion, only an objection based on fact and not opinion will cause the school to be scaled down to a reasonable number of pupils for the site. A planning decision that ignores, or makes the decision in absence of, an objective fact can be challenged. At present I can only think of one such potential objective fact.

[Muttley]

The supreme irony in the layout of this new school is that it has a puny playground and yet is due to be special*ising in sport. Blazers-for-goalposts football in the lunch-break for 950 sport-hungry boys? I think not.

[Ko]

I wish Harris would just be more open about their plans and reasoning. Eg What is the reason for the 6th form being on the boys site (is it a financial issue?) - there seems far more room at the girls site.

Also, it would be good if they could be more open about how sports facilities for the children will be provided.

They need to engage the local community because otherwise all they succeed in doing is to cause suspicion.

[macroban]

> What is the reason for the 6th form being on the boys site (is it a financial issue?) - there seems far more room at the girls site.

Slippery slope scenario points 9 and 11?

[Keef]

Hmmm 9/11 :-S

[BigDad]

The so called plan by Harris is that they will have staggered breaks to fit the boys on to the play ground and and will open up the out door pitch for use during the break ..... thus reducing the sporting facilities available of this so called sports academy while increasing the distraction for those studying indoors.

If it wasn't so serious you'd laugh .......

[Ko]

Big Dad - you're right, it is serious.

The Harris website says:

"The Council and the Harris Federation are working together to ensure that students have access to the sports facilities that they require. The majority of these will be provided on the site and with the support of the Harris Girls? Academy. Other sports facilities will be provided off site [Peckham Rye??? - my words] in close proximity to the Academy to ensure students and staff do not need to travel too far during lesson times."

This is what the website says now, but we still have to see how things will pan out in practice. The lack of consultation is not the best way to go about it.

It would be good if they could come up with some decent sports facilities. Hopefully the facilites inside the school will be pretty good. I think compromises are going to be made, and not necessarily for the right reasons.

The difficulty with the whole schools issue is that a lot of it is political - eg Labour wanting to promote the Academies programme (although I've read a bit about the Conservatives liking the Academies idea as well, but who knows how they would handle the whole Academies thing if they were in power).

Lord Harris and his federation have 7 Academies, so he's obviously important to the government in helping along their Acedemies programme. I wonder what Tessa Jowell's take on all of this is??

I think one way to ease pressure on the boys' site is to have the whole sixth form on the girls' site. They have different ideas though...

[BigDad]

Given that the Govt says it wants 5 hours of sports per week, the current design of the school appears to prohibit any such action. There is one sports hall and an outdoor sports pitch (which will not be useable during the e-x-t-e-n-d-e-d breaks they will be having as they need the space because of the minute size of the paltry playground) so the facilities on site are not suitable

So what will they do - use Peckham Rye on a daily basis? More than likely! Also they say they will use the girls school .... but hang on - the girls school wanted to stay a girls school which would exempt any boys being taught there! So if they can teach boys there - and they plan on about 50 a day being moved backwards and forwards - why not look at both sites and see what would be the best configuration to teach the maximum number of children the combined sites can manage?

But - and here is the crux of the matter - its now got political. The Lib Dem councillors and Tessa Jowell (strange bedfellows indeed!) do not want to be the ones to stop it and would rather it go ahead and not deal with the consequences of having an overcrowded school.

[BigDad]

I forgot to say

Wednesday 18th is the deadline for planning objections!!!!

Check out the plans - the design is truly appalling

[macroban]

The answer lies in the Victorian Metropolitan Water Board sewers.

With the caveat that I can't remember these being replaced.

The sewers have a design capacity. This is an objective fact.

There has been no impact assessment of sewage disposal for the c1100 persons that will be squeezed onto the site.

This is a calculation for a civil engineer.

If the sewers have insufficient bore and gradient planning permission cannot be granted without replacing the sewers.

Planning permission also cannot be granted if this calculation is unknown. This would be reckless.

If planning permission is granted despite this calculation being unknown there are grounds for appeal.

[BigDad]

EXTENSION!

The deadline for submitting objections to the plans has been extended to Aug 5th. If you think were complaining about nothing then check out the plans! http://www.edge-campaign.co.uk/

[BigDad]

Harris Academy and Parent Governors

Does anyone know how many parents Harris allows on to the board of governors at its other schools? The minimum is 1 but most schools have at least 2. I had heard that Harris had reduced the number to 1 due to some conflicts - can anyone confirm this?

[Adam Glasser]

The campaign against the school is not just NIMBY. Some facts about objections to the proposed school:

1 - Southwark Council did a very detailed Feasibility Study on the school in 2004 ( as a result of EDEN campaign for a new school). You can look on the Southwark website for more details. The conclusion of this report was for a 'small boys school' of about 450 pupils.

2 - Neither the Harris Federation nor any of the supporters of the school have produced the factual calculation which says that this site of 1.85acres can sustain a school of 950 pupils - the same number they are proposing for the Upper Site on Homestall Rd. This Upper Site ( where the Girls School is now located) is 5.96acres - nearly three times the size of the Lower Site. How is this fair to the boys?

3 - The Original Expression of Interest which called for a Federated Joint Academy placed a mixed 6th on the larger Upper Site. In the recent plans presented to local parents, the 6th Form is now split between the Upper and Lower site, adding yet more pressure on the confined space to the Lower Site. When and why did Harris suddenly decide, without consulting local residents or parents, to load more pupils on the Lower Site?

4 - Design of the new building: many lay people and local architects were confused and skeptical of the new design when it was presented to the public for the first time 5th June. Since then the design has been criticised in all aspects by the Southwark Review Panel and this is the conclusion of their report:

"In conclusion, the Panel sees very little merit in the scheme and expresses

alarm at the number of missed opportunities it represents. If demolition and

replacement of the existing building is pursued, it is reasonable to expect

design excellence from the new proposal.".

5 - On the Harris Plans ( see the EDGE website referred to above) submitted to the Council, the surveyors have written off the old building with without gain access to the inside of the building for a proper survey. They have simply photographed the building from the outside and concluded that it is not worth keeping, even though the fire damage is much less serious than appears. This building deserves to be considered before it is pulled down in favour of by all accounts a badly designed new building.

Absolutely no one independent has spoken up publically in favour of the proposed new design for the school.

* * *

Local parents have been asking for comprehensive answers to these questions before supporting the new school. These really need to be fully addressed by Harris and anyone supporting the new school before it can be given the go ahead.

[macroban]

I saw Hilary Benn on television last night.

He said that developers can't just plug into the old VIctorian drainage systems that wern't designed for "these numbers".

Reminded me of this proposed Harris Academy and what I wrote a few days ago.

[Dulwich_ Park_ Fairy]

Certainly amongst the parents I have spoken to there seems to be a big divide over the size of the school. Those who live within a 400m radius of the proposed site seem to favour a small "village school" which really would be the perfect outcome for them; their children would be one of the few guaranteed to get in and their property prices would shoot through the roof. Those who are unfortunate to live at the top of Upland/Friern/Barry Road, a mere 10 minute walk away, would unsuprisingly like a bigger school and have no interest in one being built for the sole benefit of a handful of East Dulwich residents.

[*Bob*]

DPF.. what a superb example of exaggeration to the power of 10.

'village school'

'the few guaranteed to get a place'

'a handful of East Dulwich residents'

How exactly would a school reduced down to a mere several hundred pupils constitute a 'village school'?

[Dulwich_ Park_ Fairy]

*Bob* Wrote:

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

> DPF.. what a superb example of exaggeration to the

> power of 10.

>

> 'village school'

> 'the few guaranteed to get a place'

> 'a handful of East Dulwich residents'

>

> How exactly would a school reduced down to a mere

> several hundred pupils constitute a 'village

> school'?

Bob

If the 450 places includes the sixth form then you are looking at 65 children (2 classes) per year. Now, I went to a state school with no 6th form that had 1600 pupils (300+ kids a year) and would therefore view something 5 times as small to be a "village school".

As I have stated before, a school such as Goodrich will have approximately 55 boys per year potentially looking for a local secondary school. This school alone could realistically take up 60% of the schools places before other schools in the East Dulwich, Nunhead, Peckham, Forest Hill catchment area are taken into account. This is also not allowing for those with families who deliberately move into the area adjacent to Piermont Green if the school gets the go ahead. How is it going to be anything other than hopelessly over-subscribed? With the majority of places going to those living in closest proximity to the school, it shouldn't be too hard to see what I meant by "the few guaranteed to get a place" and " a handful of East Dulwich residents".

[*Bob*]

DPF.. That would have been a more useful posting (for everyone) than your previous one.

Histrionics don't help 'the undecided' make a decision!

[Dulwich_ Park_ Fairy]

*Bob* Wrote:

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

> DPF.. That would have been a more useful posting

> (for everyone) than your previous one.

>

> Histrionics don't help 'the undecided' make a

> decision!

Bob

...and being in complete denial that a school of 450 pupils would be woefully inadequate (as most of the academy's detractors are) is far from helpful. They are rather unfairly being accused of nimbyism which doesn't really do them justice, pure self-interest would probably be a better way of describing it.