LondonMix

Sorry, I meant top 20%, not top 20 neighbourhoods. East Dulwich is more expensive than Brixton. I thought Blackheath was more expensive than ED though. No idea on Ealing!

Also, for those asking for more information on how Southwark calculate their projections and what the source data is please see the answer I received below: "it's multifaceted, using birth records, GP registration info, nurseries for primaries, children's centre data etc. For secondaries, a major factor is number of children attending primary schools in a given area. Geographic movement is also looked at eg they know more families are staying in the area than moving away at the end of primary than a few years ago."

EDhistory, I am not writing a dissertation but having a general chat. Assuming you aren't just being provocative and actually are interested have a look at the following places to see what you can find. I'm at work so can't get into it in any more detail right now. http://www.rightmove.co.uk/house-prices/detail.html?country=england&locationIdentifier=OUTCODE%5E2323&searchLocation=SE22&year=1&referrer=listChangeCriteria Play around with this. In the last 12 months only 516 properties were sold in the SE22 postcode though volumes historically have been higher. The relative price map was from the FT. If you have access you can find it. I remember the circa 5,000 to 6,000 households from the census.

Agree. But also, I think I saw it on a map of house prices but you can't think of ED prices as a reflection of average London prices. ED is now one of the more expensive parts of London-- I think top 20%. To move here now, you need to a high earner even by London standards. Its really as simple as that. There are I think 6,000 homes in the area and only 1,000 or so for sale a year so its not really that surprising that there are that many couples in London who make a 250k joint income and have a large chunk of equity from their first flat.

I might be one of the only regular posters that actually lives in East Dulwich... This has become a forum for most of South / South East London.

I agree with that though I don't think the DfE or the EFA act independently of the sponsor when assessing the suitability of site locations even post approval of the application. The EFA's job is to buy the site but even at the first hurdle in the application process, identifying suitable sites rests with the sponsor / applicant as part of the viability assessment. I don't believe the EFA simply forces sponsors to take sites the sponsor tells them are not suitable.

Its only logical. I mean what would be the point of applying to open a school to serve a local community if there was no way to actually do so.

I think you have to identify a potential site as part of the application process.

Exactly Fuschia. This is a violation of the legal framework surround the entire process and I understand Tessa has raised this point specifically with David Law. Moreover, a school in Nunhead is only needed if its assumed that primary age pupils should not be expected to commute long distances which is reasonable for all the reasons Otta and others have highlighted. If we take for granted that primary age pupils must commute as there is no alternative, then there is already supply in Bellenden and Dulwich to deal with the Nunhead shortage and no additional new school is needed in Dulwich. You can't say there is a shortage in Nunhead to justify building a school in Dulwich when there is already spare capacity in Dulwich in Peckham Rye. Its illogical and doesn't add up.

James are still claiming Southwark are blocking Harris from using Metropolitain Open Land to develop the school in Nunhead? Didn't Renata confirm Harris had no plans to use that land which is part of one of their schools (after speaking with the Head) and isn't this decision ultimately made by the Mayor of London? Also, in the official literature hasn't Habs stated they need the full site to provide the facilities presented to the community as part of the official consultation?

Louisa, don't toy with people's hearts like that! Of course, I will email them immediately for comment

No idea on further out. I believe Renata has said in the past that after 2016 the existing analysis is that demand stabilizes for primary places based on current analysis but here are the people who are best place to answer your question! Cabinet Member Councillor Dora Dixon-Fyle, Cabinet Member for Children?s Services Lead Officer Kerry Crichlow, Director of Strategy and Commissioning Children?s and Adults? Services I agree, the secondary situation is dire. However, I understand Southwark have already started approaching existing secondaries about their abilities to expand given how few sites there are for new secondary schools.

Here is the link again in case you can't find it buried in the thread. http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s45063/Report%20School%20Places%20Strategy%20Update.pdf Also, Southwark at a meeting earlier this year tabled a motion in support of this particular school as well though I am not sure where you can find the minutes as I followed the outcome on twitter. Sorry if my posts during my morning commute were incomprehensible. Tessa Jowell's most recent letter provides the most clear and compelling statement on the issues to hand, so its worth reading if you can find it on her website. Tessa and Labour in general are fully supportive of the campaign to prevent the primary school opening on the hospital site.

SJ, the stated position of Sothwark on secondaries is what I said and you can find it in the document linked to earlier.

There is a huge need for secondary places in the coming years. It will reach crisis levels by 2018 according to Southwark projections

StraferJack Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > so Harris are opening a another primary school > which will cannibalise their existing school? No, as average pupil numbers fall across Dulwich all local schools funding will drop undermining their financial viability. But as I and Samsopit have said, in addition to it being inappropriate to open another primary school here period, much less one approved for another area which cannot access it readily on the proposed site, the site Harris is targeting is needed for a secondary school for which there is both need and strong community support.

The hospital site will have a secondary school, that's the point. Both a primary school and a secondary school cannot comfortably be sited there and a secondary school is what is needed. The projections prepared by the council already take into account an increase in demand for primary places in 2016. That increase in demand has already been met by two new schools opening in the Dulwich. A third new primary in Dulwich is totally unnecessary and undermines the financial viability of the existing primary schools. Moreover the school was approved for Nunhead not here.

There are a few main issues. 1. The secondary school needs all the land not used by the NHS to have all the facilities it proposes 2. The Harris Nunhead school was proved for Nunhead and should be located there not in Dulwich 3. By 2016 Dulwich will already have a two form surplus (equivalent to an entire school). Adding another primary here would undermine the financial viability of our existing primaries resulting in cuts due to pupil based funding 4. Even if Harris can't find a site in Nunhead there are better options in Bellenden to deal with the potential shortage than building a primary school on the Dulwich Hospital site which is much more difficult to access from Nunhead

James I don't hate Harris- you know very well I was a loud champion and defender of their first primary school that is opening on the police site and I believe they are a strong education provider. I also don't hate you but that does not mean both you and Harris can avoid accountability. Don't pretend this is some personal grudge rather than a real political issue impacting the community. As noted above there is a need for Harris Nunhead as in an ideal scenario children would not commute from Nunhead to Bellenden rd. The point of the analysis above is that it makes more sense to use the potential 1-2 form surplus in Bellenden if Harris cannot locate in Nunhead before creating a school much further away in East Dulwich. It's also very unclear how the approval for Harris Nunhead was obtained as it clearly fell outside the normal legal process and an explanation should be provided as I am beginning to question the very legality of the approved Nunhead school.

Sorry, I wasn't accusing you of that but rather drawing the distinction for the less geeky than you and I. I think the system they use is fairly sophisticated from memory but I'll wait to confirm what I remember when I hear back from Southwark. The onus is on the council to get the numbers right and then for local academies and the DfE to follow those projections when approving schools and allocating land.

That would be two forms across all of Southwark though right Civil Servant? You don't need an extra two forms in each ward, which would actually be destructive. Oversupplying places undermines school's finances as funding is per pupil. If pupils are spread amongst too many schools all schools will struggle to sustain themselves and will have to make cuts to their provisions to deal with the reduction in the number of pupils per school. I've asked more details from the council regarding the calculation methodology and will post when I have a response but I think if they were only off by two forms for the entire borough the projections are fairly accurate. The figures posted by civil servant indicate a 2.5% margin of error. A four form surplus of places within East Dulwich would be vast.

Also, James since you appear unwilling to answer question 3 I will post the information for those interested in seeing the facts themselves regarding projected pupil numbers and oncoming supply. Please see page 3 of the report for full breakdown. http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s45063/Report%20School%20Places%20Strategy%20Update.pdf By 2016, the Dulwich area will have a surplus of at least two full forms (that?s an entire school worth of extra places) based on the most recent analysis. There was a need of 1.5 to 2 extra forms and 4 extra forms are being provided. If Harris Nunhead were located in East Dulwich on top of this, that would create a 4 to 4.5 form surplus ? that is equivalent to TWO entirely empty schools! I hope that puts this madness into perspective for anyone sitting on the fence. The analysis for Nunhead's needs is more nuanced but with the expansion of Ivydale, the need for a new primary in Nunhead is not as evident. Including the expansion of Ivydale and the Harris Nunhead, 6 new forms will be created vs a projected need of 4.5 to 5.5 (a 1.5 to 0.5 surplus of places). However, the new Belham school in Bellenden is not included in those numbers as it technically counts as Camberwell Ward (despite being very close to both Dulwich and the Peckham Rye / Nunhead ward). The Camberwell Ward area has a projected surplus of one to two forms including Belham so its quite fair to assume the shortfall in Nunhead can also be met by the nearby Belham school (this school will be run as a sister school to Dulwich Hamlet). If Camberwell?s nearby surplus is added to Nunhead?s analysis, you will have 7-8 new forms to meet a projected need of 4.5 to 5.5 forms (up to a 3.5 form surplus). Therefore, if the new two-form Harris Nunhead did not open at all, its unlikely children in Nunhead would need to travel much further than Bellenden to cope even with the upper range of the pupil forecast projections. That's much more reasonable than travelling to the hospital site and Belham has a site!

Thanks Samsopit for posting the letter?I am at work! James the letter makes clear that: 1. Harris intended this school from the outset to serve Nunhead 2. The Department for Education approved it for Nunhead (and presumably based on the shortfall that then existed for Nunhead) It is time for everyone to grow up and whatever political battles are going on between labor and the lib-dems within the council need to be put aside for common sense to reign. Please, do not build a school the community has not asked for and expressly opposes?the petition after only a few days stands a 323 signatures (a large proportion of the total support for secondary school). Do not squander the opportunity to create a fully equipped secondary school. Please do not waste taxpayers money building a school that is not needed that will undermine our local schools by creating an even larger surplus of spaces within the primary school system in this part of the borough making them more difficult to run and operate efficiently. James please listen to your constituents and talk some sense into Harris to give up this battle in which only we the community and taxpayers are the losers.

But James, the official literature and process for Harris ED never suggested people were supporting the creation of two schools in ED. You encouraged people to lend as much support as possible but that support cannot be interpreted as a mandate to develop two schools any more than the ovwhelming support of the secondary school can be interpreted as a mandate to create two secondary schools. Anyhow, based on Harris's own words the DfE did not grant them permission to develop two ED primaries but one for Nunhead families and the one on the police site. You and Harris cannot simply ignore that and do what you and they want despite the legal process and the expressed wishes of the community against such a proposition. James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Then Londonmix, > I apologise unreservably for not remembering the > letter you describe. Do you know where in the > family room I uploaded this? I've not been able to > find it. > I'm keen to see it to try and recall the context. > > > But yes, I can confirm that the supporters came > from east and south of East Dulwich ward. I would > never have described it as a school for Nunhead. > AS I've stated previously I was not and have never > been happy with it being described as Nunhead. > It's the wrong label for is a second Harris > primary school to serve the wider East Dulwich > area. > > If anyone can turn post codes into a geo map I > could share where supporters for the primary > schools came from. I'd find this useful to > visualise and suspect others would.

Also you did not answer the 3rd question. Yes or no: do you deny that the current official projections prepared by Southwark council for the Dulwich area show a surplus of primary school places? Please again remember that the documents on this are in the public domain but to save me having to repost them and people have to trawl through them, it would be helpful if you could simply clarify your previous statements by answering yes or no.