New secondary school for Willesden

Chancel House

Gail Tolley, Director of Children and Young People's Service in Brent, confirmed yesterday that a new 6 forms of entry secondary school will be built on the site of Chancel House, Neasden Lane. It will be a free school with Wembley High Technology College, an academy, as its sponsor.

Originally it was intended to refurbish the redundant DWP building, Chancel House (above) to accommodate the school but the Education Funding Agency (EFA) decided demolition and new build was preferable.

A new secondary school south of the North Circular Road has long been a demand from  residents in Willesden, Harlesden and Church End following the closure of Sladebrook High School. Neasden High School,also closed, was just on the other side of the North Circular, on that section of Neasden Lane.  Parents made the case for a school which will be at the heart of the local community. Brent Council decided not to go ahead with a possible secondary school on the Bridge Park-Unisys site as part of the regeneration. The school has the project name of North Brent School LINK but this will obviously be revised.

Interestingly Gail Tolley said that the site had been considered by the EFA for the ill-fated (and expensive to the public) Gladstone Free School. LINK

Neasden Lane suffers from poor air quality some quite heavy truck truck movements. LINK

As the primary 'bulge' moves through into secondary schools more places will be needed and the local authority is working with  academies regarding expansion. As academies they are independent of the local authority and cannot be forced to expand.

There is of course some uncertainty over the future of Brent's European families regarding Brexit and this will need to be taken into account in school places planning.

The EFA has also approved a Free Special School to be set up by the Brent Special Academy Trust on a site in the Avenue and has again opted for demolition of the existing building and building of a new school.  At present many children are transported outside the borough due to the lack of special provision in Brent.

Responding to the plateau in reception primary school applications and vacancies in some school the Ark Somerville Primary, which will be built on the car park of York House, has been reduced to 2 forms of entry. LINK

Ark DID hit the rocks in Barnet last night

 

Vin-dic-tive - Deviant Art

Guest blog by Jenny Brown

The pubic gallery was packed at Hendon Town Hall last night as residents, teachers, school governors and teaching assistants listened to the councillors question and discuss the issues regarding the Education Funding Agency's application for the building of an all-though Ark Pioneer free school on green belt land. LINK

Barnet Planning Committe rejected the planning application for the  Free School proposed by ARK PIONEER.

The EFA/ARK can appeal but the fact that Barnet council turned down the ARK PIONEER application for planning permission has  particular reference to Free Schools in general.

The decision from Barnet shows how important it is to get involved at the planning application stage and to have local councillors working with residents and resident associations.

The proposed site is in a Labour ward with active hard working councillors. Conservative supporters lobbied their councillors  too so the Conservative dominated planning committee was not prepared to pass this over-development so near to other primary and secondary schools that have scope for expansion.

The message from Barnet is that we (parents, residents, governors and teachers) expect the recommendations and legal guidance for outside play space, safety and standards, to apply to Free Schools as they do to other buildings.

This stand from Barnet should be widely shared to empower other areas to defend themselves from Free Schools especially  ARK PIONEER and their low level of education and building design.

Shortage of land for free schools is no excuse for not planning additional housing along with school places and infrastructure.

Last night the EFA /applicant for ARK argued that lack of outside play space was acceptable since in some free schools children play on roof tops. I think this one comment, tipped the balance against the whole project and the public were genuinely shocked.

Need for school places was especially relevant because the proposed site is green belt. The EFA and Tory councillors  tried unsuccessfully to argue that although it is a site on green belt, there are officers, toilets and football stands built in the recent past. Even in leafy Barnet, air quality samples are too high and at the proposed site, Barnet Friends of the Earth  found that it was high at the site.

Residents and councillors were unimpressed by the EFA  offering to purchase roads, widen them and install traffic lights. which would increase air pollution from stationary vehicles at red lights.

Areas with unsound short term arrangements for schools, should let national education organisations such as CASE know.

CASE is aware of these issues for example at Kingston Community School children are in an unsafe building surrounded by main roads with no fire assembly point possible and no plan to get children to safety should there be any type of emergency.  Buildings that are unsafe or unsuitable should not be accepted as schools. CASE would like to hear from anyone in the Kingston area who would like to help this particular school. Please visit the CASE website and consider joining.

Finally just to say that Barnet teachers and governors of local schools are shocked at the EFA's proposal to misuse the education budget by spending on roads, especially at this time.  Although this issue was not raised last night, as not relevant to a planning  committee, nevertheless the waste of money by the  Education Funding Agency is utterly unacceptable especially as the amount is enormous. CASE is working on the figures to be released soon.  Please consider looking for information on CASE. LINK

Barnet Labour Party  LINK published the following statement after the decision LINK

Plans to build an all-through Ark Academy school for up to 1,680 pupils on the Underhill Stadium site have been rejected at Barnet Council's Planning Committee (25 January).

Councillors on the committee ruled that the size and bulk of the school was too big for the site, that traffic and parking resulting from the school would have an unacceptable impact, and that there were no exceptional circumstances to allow the school to be built on greenbelt land.

The plans for the school have caused controversy and concern amongst residents living near the Underhill Stadium site, many of whom were worried about the size and scale of the school, and the parking and traffic problems it will cause.

The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, had also advised Barnet Council in October that the school's planning application as originally submitted did not comply with the London Plan.

Labour Underhill councillors had organised a public meeting for residents in September so they could hear direct from Ark representatives and Barnet council officers about the plans for the school. Over 150 residents attended, and at the end of the meeting an indicative vote showed an overwhelming majority were opposed to the plans.

Underhill councillor, Paul Edwards, who spoke against the planning application at the committee said:

I am very glad that common sense prevailed at the committee last night.

The committee's ruling reflects the concerns that residents raised at the public meeting we organised four months ago.

Their main concerns include the size and height of the school buildings; the resulting traffic problems that will inevitably paralyse Mays Lane and surrounding roads; and the development of local Green Belt land.

The development is excessively large given its very close proximity to local housing.  It will take more than three times as many pupils as the Totteridge Academy, which has a much larger site and could accommodate further expansion.

The size of the building means the school will undoubtedly invade the privacy of the  homes and gardens surrounding the school – regardless of any of the fine words in this document.

The arrival of more than 120 teaching staff and 1800 pupils every day will exacerbate a traffic problem that has already reached unacceptable levels for local residents. 62 parking spaces is going to lead to increased street parking and will inevitably lead to future calls for a CPZ.

The residents who live in close proximity of this development do not want to see this scale of development in their back gardens, nor would I suggest would any member of the committee.

The Gladstone story highlights risks attached to Brent's free school policy

The Brent Cabinet probably approved an officer report on school places provision this afternon at their Crest Academy meeting.  The report advocates providing the additional secondary places needed via free schools.

It may be worth looking at the example of the Gladstone Free School  in assessing the risks attached to this policy. The proposal goes back to  2014  when the DfE approved the application. There was a chaotic 'consultation' meeting inJanuary 2014 when it appeared the school wanted to build on playing fields agjacent to Gladstone Park. LINK

There have been huge problems in finding a site. In April 2014 the school advised parents of pupils who had been enrolled for a place in September 2014 that they should seek another school. It again failed to open this September.

The school has this week written to parents to say that after talks in 'high places' they have the support of Nick Gibb MP, Minister for Schools. They claim that he made it clear to ' DfE officials that he wanted this project to work'.

They claims that officers  from Brent Council are working directly with the Education Funding Agency and two estate agents to find the school a site. They say, as they have said before, that they understand there are several sites that 'may prove possible options'.

Gladstone state that once the EFA find a permanent site the school will be found a temporary site for the 'year or two' that it will take refurbishment, remodelling or rebuilding to be completed.

Desite this uncertainty the putative school announces that it is still open for applications: 'Gladstone School - Your Extra Choice!'

They assure parents that as Gladstone is its own admissions authority they can still make 6 choices through the Lacal Authority applications system in  addition to Gladstone. They have extended their first round admissions to February 2016 and ask parents to let others who are concerned about school places know about Gladstone.

In March this year Gladstone announced the day after children had been allocated their places that they would not be opening in September LINK

I asked at the time whether the DfE support for the school should be withdrawn to avoid the confusion and disappointment caused by enrollment but failure to open in 2014 and 2015. It ap;pears there is still a risk for September 2016 despite the active recruiting.

Another proposed  free school,  Gateway,  did not proceed after difficulties in finding a site LINK and it would be interesting to hear how Brent Council expects to get over this problem

Apart from the site uncertainties there continues to be concern  over Gladstone financial issues and the amount of money spent on the school without one child being educated. There are also suggestions of potential conflicts of interest. LINK

There are 6 current directors and 8 previous directos.

source: companycheck.co.uk

To read about other issues of concern over free schools follow this LINK








 

Too much concealed in Copland plans to make a judgement

The Brent Cabinet on August 26th will receive an update on plans for a new school on the Copland site following its takeover by Ark Academies.  Frustratingly, many of the references in the report to detail in appendices are unavailable due to the following statement:

Note for publication ('below the line')
Appendices 2 (EFA option plan), 3 (Brent option plan) and 4, 4A and 4B (commercial matters) are Not for Publication.

The EFA Option (Appendix 2) is the plan for a new school from the Education Funding Agency and Appendix 3 is Brent Council's own plan.

The fact that they are confidential means that backbench Labour and opposition councillors are unable to compare the plans and reach an informed view, and the same goes for local residents, the local press and this blogger.

The report states that a new school could be provided within the current school's footprint but claims, 'this could result in a sub-optimal solution and will entail considerable disruption to the learning environment during the two year construction period'.

It adds, 'The EFA's objectives have firmly focused solely on delivering a new school at minimal development costs, whereas Brent officers have been keen to ensure delivery of the Wembley Area Action Plan and a sustainable locally well integrated new school design with connectivity to the local community'.

Officers claim that the EFA design option (which we are not allowed to see) is inferior to the Brent Council option (which we are not allowed to see) because it ignores the 'financial benefits of an improved regeneration area'.

The Brent design would mean loss of playing field space which would require the approval of the Secretary of State and relocating a public right of way that currently dissects the school playing fields.

The report says that the EFA option would result in a reduction of redevelopment/regeneration land at the High Road and claims that the Brent option would give the benefit of a..

...new and expanded (additional one form of entry) secondary school and an expanded primary school (Elsley will double in size to 4 form entry) along with new homes (including affordable housing) retail, commercial and community floor space in line with the ambitions of the Wembley area Action Plan. The transactions may generate a capital receipt that will help offset the costs of this proposals as outline in appendix 4 (which we are not allowed to see), some of which will be incurred irrespective of whether the freehold transfer proceeds or not.

A new school building is certainly required at Copland, and has been for at least a decade,  and so of course is affordable housing. However the link with commercial development, office and retail along the High Road, leaves me a little uneasy. Is the commercial tail wagging the educational dog?


Full report on Cabinet Agenda HERE