When GRA met Gary - Meeting with Gary Barnes of London Borough of Enfield, 11 February 2014
Five GRA committee members had a useful meeting with Gary Barnes of LBE in 11 February, to find out the latest position on the proposed school development (and of course to express GRA views). A full report can be found below but the key points are:-
i) Temporary two form entry primary school to open in September 2014, with the children to transfer to a permanent school site (Grovelands is the council's preferred option) in September 2016. It was recognised that the timescale was short.
ii) The current concept was for the school to be built entirely on the Bourneside site (that is, between the drive and the Thames Water land) and perhaps a slice of land owned by the Priory. The Thames Water land would be left more or less as is, but with public access via a gate.
iii) The Priory has expressed an interest in acquiring the land between the drive and Queen Elizabeth's Drive.
iv) Pretty much everything aboiut the school and Thames Water land is open to change. The Historic Park Survey and management plan being commissioned by the council - and the reaction of English Heritage- could change things, as could covenants on land. GRA would be given the opportunity to meet the Council's consultant during development of survey and plan.
v) There is a "Plan B" if the school cannot proceed on the Grovelands site but details could not be given.
vi) Looking at the wider picture in South West Enfield, Broomfield School could not expand to become a through school until and unless it improves its educational attainment record. Garfield School is being expanded by one form.
You can find links to various documents supplied by Mr Barnes below, including a Position Statement from the council, maps showing land ownership and the potential positioning of buildings, traffic access etc. on the site, and a plan of the school buildings themselves.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Report of meeting between Grovelands Residents Association and Gary Barnes of London Borough of Enfield, held at Enfield Civic Centre on 11th February 2014
GRA committee members present: Chris Binns, Michael Clary, Alison Mason, Frank Farmer and Wendy Boast.
Role of Grovelands Residents Association and relationship with council
Mr Barnes confirmed that the GRA is accepted as a key local stakeholder in discussing the school project and the Historic Parks Survey as a whole, along with Friends of Grovelands, Bourneside and SWEAT and (of course) English Heritage. GRA suggested Fox Lane in own right and Southgate Civic Trust.
Historic Parks Survey (HPS) – state of play, timetable and opportunities for input and/or comment
Historic Parks Survey and the associated estate management plan are due to be drawn up by end-March but (like all timescales quoted) could slip. Consultant had started work in January 2014. We (and Friends of Grovelands) will be given an opportunity to meet the consultant who is conducting the survey and drawing up the plan. English Heritage and all stakeholders (and all residents) will have the chance to comment.
Timetable for school
The budget is potentially already there within the Primary Expansion Programme funds but specific funding would have to be agreed by the Council Cabinet (August 2014). This assumes that design principles have been agreed with English Heritage and that initial consultation with key stakeholders has concluded (up to July 2014). Funding would also be necessary for purchase of Thames Water land (to be approved September 2014 for purchase October 2014). Planning permission, including any agreement with English Heritage by January 2015. Procurement and delivery in time to open September 2016. Mr Barnes accepted that the timescale was short. He noted that councils are permitted to commission some work (e g from architects) on at “at risk” basis before planning permission is granted, but no physical work can be done.
Current concept/plan for school
The current concept envisaged the school being built almost entirely on the Bourneside area plus some land hoped can be bought from Priory (see below), so there would be no use of the Thames Water land. The plan includes four tennis courts for joint school/community use. It would be traditional single storey build, not modular. It is not (in current concept) a buried building any more.
There would be a drop off area off The Bourne, equidistant from Lodge and Bourne Avenue (entrance no longer opposite Bourne Avenue). Mr Barnes was unable to give other examples of primary schools with such an arrangement. Parking would be for staff only. A nursery has to be incorporated somewhere within the site. Mr Barnes noted that this posed further transport-related challenges, as nursery children often live further away. In response to GRA’s serious concerns on the issue, Mr Barnes acknowledged that there would be transport issues to be considered as part of the planning process. A detailed traffic survey would be conducted following the submission of the finished plan. It should be noted that the plans shown are still only concept plans both in terms of the school buildings and (for example) the drop off area; they should not be considered final (the current drawing has been developed to facilitate subsequent consideration of the covenants that exist on the land).
Mr Barnes confirmed that the school would operate as part of an existing council primary school.
Thames Water land
Current thinking is that the Thames Water land should remain in its current state, as a nature reserve, with perhaps some active management and structure, but would be opened up via single gate from park and from the school. However this will all be considered as part of the historic parks survey and in the development of the management plan.
Clarification of land ownership as of now and under proposal
Mr Barnes presented a document which made clear who own what. The council owns the Bourneside area and nearly all the land between the drive and QED down to #1 QED (that is, not just a strip by the fence as some had believed). The Council owns most of land on which it is proposed to build the school. It was thought that it would be possible to build the school without a piece of Priory land but the layout would need to be revised. Even with fewer tennis courts, there are regulations on ensuring sufficient recreation space.
In discussions about land, The Priory has expressed an initial interest in acquiring all the land between drive and QED. Mr Barnes thinks they may wish to expand their hospital operations, perhaps in the area around the current Popcorn nursery and the tennis courts which had been reclaimed by woodland. GRA noted that security for both hospital and school were important issues. There was absolutely no guarantee of getting planning permission and it would presumably have to fit in with the management plan, as agreed with English Heritage. The Council has continually rebuffed Thames Water attempts to put housing on their land. Mr Barnes noted that there are complex covenants on the Grovelands estate lands and said that work on exploring these had been commissioned. He acknowledged that covenants could provide a major obstruction to building a school.
Plans for rest of South West Enfield; council evidence for where need is greatest
Although revised overall need figures were provided, these were not discussed. These, and the geographical breakdown of the figures, were better discussed with the Primary Expansion Programme team. Mr Barnes refuted the belief that the council had initially opposed the Ashmole proposal. Mr Barnes stated that educationally it would be inappropriate to consider expanding Broomfield School at present to become a through school because its current educational attainment record was not good enough. Garfield School was being expanded. There were also plans to expand a further primary school (unnamed). To Mr Barnes’s knowledge there are no discussions with Walker on expansion currently taking place but the issue is not closed.
Availability (or otherwise) of Southgate College and other alternatives
Mr Barnes stated that the College wishes to dispose of the old Minchenden site and is obliged to obtain “best value” in order to fund developments across the road, value being associated with the use to be made of the land. The college has made no approaches to the Council’s planning department at the present time. Mr Barnes did not deny that compulsory purchase was possible but it had not been given any consideration thus far; he gave the impression that it would be difficult. The Council has a requirement to deliver pupil places across all of the different age groups and sectors and therefore must remain open minded in terms of all options and sites. A valuation of the Minchenden site has been commissioned by the council. See “Plan B” below for more.
Plans for temporary school
The council was currently negotiating for a two year lease on suitable buildings. The school would operate in these buildings for two years, at which point pupils would transfer to the new school, which would thus start with three years filled.
What happens if Grovelands School cannot proceed (“Plan B”)?
Grovelands is the council’s preferred option at present but Mr Barnes stated that there is a “Plan B” site for a school if Grovelands cannot proceed but he could not give details.
Loss of green space and disturbance to wildlife
This was not really discussed beyond the above. Mr Barnes will provide names of council contacts on wildlife and nature side.
GRA thanked Mr Barnes for the meeting; all present agreed that the meeting had been useful and informative.
Michael Clary
Joint Chair
Grovelands Residents Association
Comentários