Charter School East - consultations

[laith]

.

[BrandNewGuy]

Go to the link I put above and you'll see that the 'chateau' and entrance are to be retained:

http://www.chartereastdulwich.org.uk/_site/data/files/users/2/68364016F0E646B3810036D83AC73AC4.pdf

[ED_moots]

Underground car park?

[Curmudgeon]

I think a school without a decent staff car park may have staffing issues.

I currently work in a school with much better transport links than ED including tube, 2 train stations within 10 minutes walk and buses. The car park possibly fits around 30 cars. It is not just teachers who drive to work (and some from a great distance, but site, admin, support, specialists,caterers as well as visitors requiring parking) it is a constant mess of staff being blocked in.

It is naive to believe that a proportion of staff will not need to drive in to work either due to distance or other responsibilities.

[macutd]

Well said Curmudgeon! It's good that somebody is able to tell the reality of what will happen.

Naive and idealistic without a grip on reality, but i fear these planners just don't care about the local community and just want to make their project seem green, when all they have done in reality is pushed the cars elsewhere.

[James Barber]

Hi Galileo,

Currently Melbourne Grove northern section has around 5,000 vehicles movements a day. I suspect a number dropping/picking up people going to the station. adding 6-12 parents dropping kids/picking them up is unlikely much worse - at lest the maths suggests it won't.

If i remembers correctly the school will operate 9am so a tad after the peak rush hour period.

Hi BNG, thanks for answering faith Q.

Hi ED_Mots, under ground car parks extremely expensive. That would require some school facilities not happening such as a sports hall. So I hope the money isn't used in that way. Unless you know a friendly multi millionaire?

Hi Curmudgeon, macutd,

I won't pretend I'm not concerned but the Charter people who have very successfully run a local school for many years don't think they need one.

But we'll see when the CPZ around the current Charter school is implemented and the latest school travel plan staff survey. and the traffic study they'll need for the temporary and permanent planning permission.

[matthew123]

I keep reading that the local area is too expensive to live in for those earning school wages and hence staff will be coming from further south and with a poor train service I'd venture the vast majority of school employees will drove to work. It's naive to think that quality teachers, who have a choice of location, would choose a school without a high level of free parking.

[ED_moots]

Charter have some very ambitious targets for this new school. We can't realistically expect or want them to discriminate against teachers that drive, if they are the best ones.

James. Everyone knows you're anti car. I respect that but please do not bring that agenda into this (cpz already raised on this thread). People who live near the site have to consider the reality of a 1680 student school arriving. The traffic movements aren't comparable with the hospital 30 years ago.

I agree a subteranean car park would cost a bit more but the efa agreed to slap another storey on easily enough. They wanted the school to take more places so should accommodate more staff without relying on nearby roads.

If you want to keep the nonspecific garden space then it could go under the MUGA court. Why, exactly would the sports hall have to go? It's disappointing that no proper playing field is proposed btw. Astro is not great for most outdoor sports.

I remind myself that this is only pre planning proposal and I expect the planning consultation process to account for the parking concerns.

[ED_moots]

Ps. The obvious and sensible solution is a shared parking space with the nhs plot. Efficient use of space. but I know that coopration with nhs property services is proving difficult.

[first mate]

James, might have known that sooner or later you'd get CPZ back on the agenda.

[ed_pete]

Actually FM I think it first mentioned on this thread by BrandNewGuy in a post further up. But you're more interested in having a jab at JB than the facts I guess.

[rorsome]

I live on East Dulwich Grove, but am unfamiliar with historic CPZ proposals. Would someone kindly provide a brief summary of what was proposed and what was decided (if anything)?

[edhistory]

rorsome Wrote:

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

> I live on East Dulwich Grove, but am unfamiliar

> with historic CPZ proposals. Would someone kindly

> provide a brief summary of what was proposed and

> what was decided (if anything)?

Was the conclusion that we should look at a Champion Hill CPZ first before going down the hill and imposing a CPZ on East Dulwich?

John K

[spider69]

When did this Champion Hill thing rear its ugly head?

Again absolute no need. What has this Council got against motorist?

Is this all to do with the not needed quietway and the crazy idea of making Champion Hill one way. One of the idea put up by Sustrans which will mean it going through because Southwark will claim we took advice just to cover their baks

[BrandNewGuy]

No, it was a lengthy (!) debate and consultation a few years ago about a CPZ for the area of north Melbourne Grove and the roads to the east near the station. The forum search can't find it at the moment, but the main reasons for opposition were:

1. It would reduce the amount of local parking not increase it

2. The knock-on effects on streets not in the zone weren't properly considered

3. Cost ? what guarantee would there be that the council wouldn't put up the permit fee remorselessly?

The opposition won the day.

[ed_pete]

@rorsome

CPZ's are a very contentious subject however I'll attempt to objectively summarise what happened.

Way back in 2011 (I think) there was a consultation on introducing a CPZ in some of the streets either side of Grove Vale on the premise that a lot of commuters were using these streets for parking for East Dulwich station.

There were a lot of opposing view on this forum and James Barber who came in for a lot a criticism as he supported the proposals.

There was also a great deal of concern that the CPZ would create overspill into the adjoining streets the inevitable conclusion of which would be the widening of the CPZ area.

Ultimately the Council backed down and that was the end of it.

[Penguin68]

some of the streets either side of Grove Vale on the premise that a lot of commuters were using these streets for parking for East Dulwich station.

There was also some evidence that in some quite close streets to ED station - i.e. Ondine Road, it was actually easier to park there during the day than at night, suggesting that the parking pressure was more from ED residents who were car commuting away from ED than from those commuting in to it. The proposed lay-outs actually removed car parking spaces. The 'strangers commuting in, keep ED for ED people' trope turned out to be a bit of dog whistle politics, not necessarily supported by the facts.

[James Barber]

Hi ED_Moots,

1,680 pupils. How do you make that number?

I'm not anti car. I'm pro waling, cycling and public transport. I have a full driving licence and we have a family car. I'm hugely concerned we're walking into disastrous climate for my kids. Please don't confuse those into being anti car. Cars are a useful tool.

I've said I think we have two tests to

hi first mate,

At no point have I raised or suggested CPZ for our area on this. The issue is dead for me. I've pointed out that a new CPZ is being introduced around the current Charter School in Village ward and that IF the assertion from residents that teachers parking around the school on residential streets is a real issue the CPZ will flush this out. We'll then know if our Charter East Dulwich needs more parking in the final school layout.

Hi edhistory,

most of Champion Hill has been part of a CPZ for over a dozen years. The recent CPZ consultation about including the Champion Hill Council housing estate found that this council estate residential didn't want to be part of an extended CPZ. All other roads and area are going to be part of the new CPZ. These roads are part of Village ward and South Camberwell ward.

Hi spider69,

The new CPZ in Village ward is around commuter parking near N.Dulwich station, Herne Hill station and Kings College hospital staff. Its a consequence of the CPZ streets near Herne Hill station and domino effect.

It may lead to people no longer able to park near N.Dulwich station parking near E.Dulwich station and adding pressure to our patch. Equally it may not.

no changes to the existing Champion Hill CPZ have been agreed and non are proposed to take place.

[ED_moots]

1680 students will be the population of the school when finished including 6th form. An increase of approx 500 from the original charter proposal. Confirmed by Southwark and Charter project managers and chair of governors with whom I spoke on Tuesday. EFA agreed to funding and exerted cabinet level pressure on NHS property services (that's what it took to agree the deal) to release the site for a school rather than flats ONLY if the intake was increased to 8 form entry.

Larger population = larger catchment area and staffing needs = more people driving to the site. 1680 kids @ 30 per form = 56 teachers, add specialist teachers and a management team then support staff and you're easily over 100 staff.

Let's be sensible and say half will want or 'need' to drive, that's 50 cars (they might car-share if they happen to live near each other) and nowhere to put them. And that's assuming every single child walks/cycles/buses to school.

This isn't a showstopper, just needs a solution provided by Charter and NHS. Looking forward to their joint traffic survey.

Maybe a barrier at both ends of MG North?!

[locallass]

If you want a school in your local community with good teachers and support staff you're either going to have to accept them driving in from surrounding areas and parking somewhere, or you're going to have to offer them homes near enough to walk/cycle in at a price payable on their wages. House prices in this area are so far out of the reach of most school staff and the transport links are pretty tricky to the EDH site - of course lots of them are going to drive. Unless you want an entire school staffed by early twenty somethings living in house shares and leaving the minute they're old enough to have a place of their own.

It's all a bit unseemly:

We want a shiny new school for our kids.

It must be right near our incredibly expensive houses so our kids get in, not other people's.

It must have fantastic facilities for our kids so no car park.

And we definitely don't want any annoying teachers parking on our streets.

So the teachers better live way out where they can afford a house and then get the train before dawn and trek down to the school site in time to provide our children with a world class education for the day before they lug their marking on their 90 minute walk/bus/train commute home. Charming. I'd definitely want to work there.

[BrandNewGuy]

'Poor transport links' is perhaps a red herring. Curmudgeon pointed out a (probably far from unusual) school with excellent public transport links and still loads of staff who drive. House prices local to their work are out of reach for millions of Londoners who have to commute and seem to do so willingly. Why do teachers get a blanket exemption? Teachers? main pay range in Inner London starts on ?27,819 and goes up to ?37,862. And upper pay ranges go from ?42,756 to ?46,365. And more for ?leading practitioners?, heads etc. Is there really nowhere reasonably commutable to ED for these salaries?

Disappointed to see the 'lug their marking' meme crop up. As I mentioned above, it would be nice if the education business considered entering the 21st century.

I'm not being 'anti-teacher', but in a situation as complex as transport and parking in an inner London borough, we should look at all aspects of what is creating stresses and not unthinkingly give some a 'free pass'.

[rorsome]

ed_pete Wrote:

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

> @rorsome

> CPZ's are a very contentious subject however I'll

> attempt to objectively summarise what happened.

> Way back in 2011 (I think) there was a

> consultation on introducing a CPZ in some of the

> streets either side of Grove Vale on the premise

> that a lot of commuters were using these streets

> for parking for East Dulwich station.

> There were a lot of opposing view on this forum

> and James Barber who came in for a lot a criticism

> as he supported the proposals.

> There was also a great deal of concern that the

> CPZ would create overspill into the adjoining

> streets the inevitable conclusion of which would

> be the widening of the CPZ area.

> Ultimately the Council backed down and that was

> the end of it.

Thanks, @ed_pete! Very useful.

[locallass]

It's not a 'meme', it's a thing teachers do. They mark sets of 30 exercise books. Sometimes they also set online homework and all sorts of other exciting modern stuff, but most parents seem to want their children to be set handwritten tasks in exercise books and have them marked by teachers and most teachers find that is the best way to monitor progress.

Anyway, it's not about teachers being different really - the issue applies to anyone who is working on the site and that will probably be as many non-teaching as teaching staff. And yes, of course people all over London commute to their jobs via public transport but generally less so when their jobs aren't in the centre of town. The East Dulwich Hospital site is not like working in the City or some other central location with a huge number of straightforward transport links centred on it. It is in a suburb which is not particularly easy to get to via public transport.

And as a teacher at another school in the area, I can confirm that it is hugely difficult to find affordable housing in reasonable commuting distance. We lost three excellent and experienced members of staff from our department last year because they wanted family homes and that meant moving too far away to be able to travel into work each morning. We have replaced all three of them with young newly qualified staff who are living in house shares. They're great, but's not really sustainable to run a school entirely on nqts.

I certainly don't think it's a good idea to have lots of people driving - I live locally and I know that the traffic is already a nightmare round there in the mornings - but it doesn't seem a very good idea to make it impossible for staff to park anywhere unless you can think of an alternative. Lay on a staff coach? Insist they all live on the 37 bus route? Recruit only the partners of bankers and lawyers who can afford to live in SE22/24?

[matthew123]

Why are double standards used for pupil allocation rules between the two Charter schools? i.e. safest walk distance versus straight-line distance.

The Charter School North Dulwich* - "the distance from each applicant?s home to the designated main entrance of the school by the shortest safe walking distance route in metres"

The Charter School East Dulwich** - "The distance from each child?s home to the school ... the finish point is proposed to be sited on the school site boundary closest to Jarvis Road. Distance is measured in meters and on a straight-line basis"

* http://www.charter.southwark.sch.uk/attachments/download.asp?file=79&type=pdf

** http://www.charter.southwark.sch.uk/_files/8C9BF13CE2F442A35187158B2F6BD1C5.pdf

[ED_moots]

There is another thread on this and a piece in the guardian with the inferrance being that Charter RPH wanted to exclude entrants from a nearby estate which is connected (in their view) by an unsafe walkway. This 'safest distance' definition is unusual and has been challenged - seems wiffy to me.

I would guess the new definition might be to do with the proximity to the railway line and that anyone north of it would be disadvantaged if applying the 'safest walking route' criteria.

Oh... And it seems more FAIR (fairer? - Please could a non-driving English teacher help me here)