|
|
 |
| |
Planning committee member Councillor Stefan Kasprzyk surveying the site where some residents hope a new school will be built |
D-Day nears in school site battle
Planners due to decide on proposal that has split supporters of primary and its neighbours
A MOMENTOUS decision on whether or not to build a £6million primary school on a semi-derelict recreation ground in Upper Holloway is expected to be made on Tuesday.
Whatever the decision about the future of Ashmount School, one group of residents is going to be disappointed.
On one side are the school and its supporters, including headteacher Pana McGee and TV comedienne and parent Arabella Weir, who have waited for almost five years for a new building.
On the other side are residents who argue that refurbishment or rebuilding the school on its current site in Hornsey Lane makes more financial sense and would prevent building on precious open land.
The existing draughty, four-storey, glass-clad, 1960s-built school was designed by HT Cadbury-Brown, one of the principal architects of the Festival of Britain. But it tends to be cold in the winter and hot in the summer, and has all its toilets on the ground floor.
Two years ago, the council earmarked Crouch Hill recreation ground as a potential site for the new school. Under the plan, Ashmount would be demolished to make way for flats, and a new four-storey school would be built at Crouch Hill.
The scheme would mean Bowlers Nursery, which currently uses the Crouch Hill site, could be improved and a derelict Cape Youth Centre restored for public use. The scheme to build on the recreation ground is backed by planning officers.
But objectors argue that the proposed new building would be close to wildlife habitats such as Parkland Walk.
They point out that the rec is 10 to 15 minutes from the current school by foot, which might pose problems for parents who will have to travel longer distances. The new building would take more children from nearby Haringey. The school argues that new premises would simply create a wider catchment area.
A council survey indicated that the school could be refurbished on the existing site. English Heritage, which has not listed the building, apparently would like some of its iconic features to be preserved.
A decision should have been made at last month’s Islington Council north area committee meeting chaired by Labour councillor Wally Burgess, but was deferred at the last moment for more information.
Chairman of the school governors, David Barry, said that previous studies had shown that the bill for refurbishment was too high and the building would not meet modern standards.
“It still wouldn’t fix issues like the lack of toilets on upper floors, the fact that the only access to classrooms is through other classrooms and the lack of wheelchair access,” he said.
“What you would be doing is spending a very large amount of money on refurbishing and then doing it again in a few years’ time.”
For the objectors, resident Frances Wilkinson said: “The reality is that rebuilding or refurbishment saves money and means a recreational ground is saved for recreation.
“Why rebuild when they can refurbish on the current site? It doesn’t make sense.”
Whatever the decision on Tuesday, the battle is not over yet. The next stage is a decision by London Mayor Boris Johnson. And then either side might still be able to press for a public inquiry.
Security expert: good design can overcome police fears
SCHOOL supporters responded angrily this week to a police report suggesting the proposed site for a new primary could attract paedophiles and anti-social behaviour.
Parents and teachers who back plans for a new Ashmount School on Crouch Hill recreation ground in Upper Holloway claim the report presented an “unbalanced” and “worst-case scenario”.
A well-attended nursery on the site did not attract crime, they pointed out.
Requests by the Tribune to quiz the unnamed author of the police report drew a blank.
Lee Hutchinson, from private security group Park Guard, which is made up of former police officers, said he believed the report aimed to guide planners rather than oppose the school being built.
“This is a popular, well-used site,” he said. “Everywhere gets problems but the rec is not a crime hotspot.
“But most importantly, all potential problems can be resolved by proper design of buildings and planning.”
He added that rather than encourage anti-social behaviour a school might actually benefit the area. It would get rid of derelict buildings which could always attract undesirables.
The police report suggested that woodland might give paedophiles the opportunity to hide behind trees. Mr Hutchinson said: “There are often going to be trees around but it doesn’t always mean people want to hide behind them.”
Lib Dem councillor Greg Foxsmith, who has a child at Ashmount, said: “You wouldn’t know from the report that there was a nursery on the site. I wonder if the authors ever actually visited the area. It sounds to me that they looked at a computer and made observations that are applicable anywhere.”
Cllr Foxsmith said that council planners maintained all the problems highlighted in the report could be resolved.
“I don’t think the police have engaged with the people on the site,” he added. “As far as I know they have not spoken to parents and staff at the nursery. If they are not recommending a viable, safe and happy nursery to close because of their fears, how can they oppose a new school nearby?”
An Islington police spokeswoman said there were many other factors to consider with regard to the relocation of Ashmount School and discussions were still going on.
“Deciding whether or not a location is suitable for a school is different to that of a nursery or youth club,” she added. “A school is much larger and houses high-value equipment, increasing the likelihood of theft and criminal damage.
“There are numerous other factors to consider, such as the size and make up of the building, entry points and specific location.” |
 |
|
|
|
Your comments:
I read your articles and have to point out one very important fact that was not printed:The new building on the Crouch Hill site will not encroach on the wild life habitat, indeed it will sit side by side as does the existing structure. I implore interested commentators to explore the existing site and see for themselves what is actually there at present an unused and valuable community resource. In fact the existing site (and new) cannot be seen from the Parkland Walk.
Vaughan Melsom |
| |
|
|
|
