As I posted on the 'Fairlawn outstanding' thread, surely with such a brilliant education provider in their Borough, and such a shortage of good school places (or indeed any school places) surely event Lewisham can see that facilitating an extension to Fairlawn here, rather than temporary accommodation, makes far more SENSE!!

This may well be true but as the good people of Lewisham voted Labour en masse leading to them winning all but one of the council seats then the Labour group have to assume that people wanted more of what they were offering.

You get the government that you deserve.

This post was last modified: 09-11-2014 08:40 PM by BringOutTheCranston.

I have never really liked the phrase "you get the government you deserve" it sounds too much like Calvinist predestination.

Personally, I want efficient, fair and transparent government and if I don't think I am getting that then I will do my best to change things.

As for Lewisham voting en masse for Labour I think you must have been looking at different stats to me. On a 37% turnout with the winner getting 51% of the vote it means that less than one in five eligible voters put a cross against Mayor Bullock's name. I haven't done the maths for the local elections but it isn't going to be much different there.

Yes, Labour came first in all but one of the local councillor elections but that was down to the first past the post system. PR would have seen a different and, IMHO, a healthier political mix at local level.

Anyway, it is a poisoned chalice for our local Napoleons. If things haven't improved by the time the next elections come along they will only have themselves to blame.

Article about this site in the South London Press:
http://www.southlondon-today.co.uk/News....%20schools

http://planning.lewisham.gov.uk/online-a...CAPR_72775

Seems a planning application was submitted early January for an HMO then rapidly withdrawn. No suggestion as to why. Anyone any ideas?

Well, could it have anything to do with the protest outside the Town Hall? If you haven't seen it yet I recommend it. Ironic that it is right in front of an empty council building that could easily accomodate numerous families. OR could it have anything to do with the upcoming election? More thoughts will be welcome.

Used to see Alex and Phil about regularly. Saw one of the new Labour councillors couple of weeks ago for the first time since the election, looking for votes in the upcoming election. Never see any of them in Forest Hill otherwise.

Agree with above,
And they seem to have little to no presence on this site.
very disappointing

Have a look on the Water on Ewelme Road thread and you will see how active Paul is. He's arranged a meeting with Thames Water at 11 on Thursday and has given an open invitation to raise any other issues.

Hello all

Thanks for the wide ranging comments - I wanted to give you an update regarding this issue with the Council question I recently asked.

I would also like to welcome any Forest Hill Ward resident to attend my next advice surgery on the 14 Feb at Forest Hill Library 10.30-12 noon.

You can attend the next Forest Hill Assembly meeting which is due to take place on Tuesday 17 Feb from 7pm at the TNG Centre on Wells Park Rd where we will hopefully have a presentation looking at the Homeless and Hostel position update and also the borough wide 20 mph - we hope you can make it.

Contact me on any issues using the details below. I would be also be more than happy to meet with residents or groups face to face for a beer or a cup of coffee in Forest Hill.

Best wishes

Cllr Paul Upex
Forest Hill Ward
020 8314 9952
cllr_paul.upex@lewisham.gov.uk
@paulupex
http://www.labour4foresthill.org.uk



LONDON BOROUGH OF LEWISHAM

COUNCIL MEETING

21 JANUARY 2015


Question by Councillor Upex
of the Cabinet Member for Housing

Question

Will the Cabinet member provide an update regarding proposals at Hamilton Lodge?


Reply

Hamilton Lodge is a detached 4 storey (including attic floor) Edwardian house, currently configured as a 32 room care home in Honor Oak. The property was purchased to convert for short term use (around 5 years) into a hostel for use as temporary accommodation configured to meet existing B&B demand. The current draft plans produce 22 units containing 81 bedspaces configured as follows: 7 x 2 bedspaces; 1 x 3 bedspaces; 8 x 4 bedspaces; 4 x 5 bedspaces; 2 x 6 bedspaces. 14 of these units are self-contained. This meets both current B&B demand and the requirements of the Mayor and Cabinet reports dated 19th February and the 9th April 2014.

The Council is in the process of preparing a planning application for this property to convert it from its current use to a hostel. The aim is to submit this application in February 2015. There have been two informal public consultation events held and the feedback from the community has been fed into the plans where possible. There will be a further public consultation event held if there are more than ten objections as part of the planning process.

The property is occupied by property guardians whilst the planning application is being prepared. The application will also be submitted at the same time as the planning application for Canonbie Road, where the Council will have vacant possession by the end of January 2015.

Given that this area of the ward has such a chronic shortage of primary school places, the location seems very ill thought through. It would have been much better served as an extention to either Fairlawn or Horniman schools. It's really disapointing that Paul Upex has shown no sensitivity to this at all. It would have been a very obvious solution to a very obvious local problem. I'm speaking as a parent who has 2 children within spitting distance of this location, neither of whom got local community school places. Paul, next time you're canvassing for votes in the area (and I still remember you offering to drive me to the polling station), you'll do well to avoid me!

Well said Curtaintwitching. The councillor's comments amazed me at the extent to which they completely failed to address the comments from this thread. If there are good arguments for the council's intended use in preference of school places (for example) then I would be open to them. But there is not even a pretence of a counter-argument.

I would be interested in signing a petition. I wonder if the councillor could give us an indication of how many signatories a petition in favour of converting this building to a school, rather than a temporary shelter for the homeless, it would take for the council to consider changing it's plans.

School places issue was discussed in September 2014 Assembly. All of the minutes of the assemblies can be found at http://www.lewisham.gov.uk/getinvolved/l...fault.aspx

Extract from the minutes on School Places provision

Meeting of Forest Hill Assembly, Tuesday, 16th September, 2014 7.00 pm (Item 18.)

Minutes:

Cllr Paul Maslin and Chris Threlfall highlighted that issues around there not being enough school place provision has been raised in the past in Forest Hill regarding Horniman and Fairlawn. The pressure for school places in Forest Hill and Sydenham will continue. Other wards across Lewisham are experiencing the same problems. They explained that the way the department deals with it is to forward plan by looking at how many places they think they need , then negotiate with schools and their governing bodies about how we are going to supply them. He explained that part of the restraints are definitely financial, 2008 was the first year where extra places needed to be created and it has escalated from thereon.

He explained that by now they would have liked to have created more permanent places, not just by putting on an extra class , but, for example, to change one form of entry to two , or a two form entry to three. Some of this has happened but they have had to rely on introducing bulge classes and will continue to do this.

One positive is that the process started in 2009/10, so 7 years worth of a bulge class will now create an ongoing space. In 2016 , across the Borough, there will be spaces as one bulge class comes through and the next one starts.

The next couple of years are going to be difficult, he explained that for Forest Hill and Sydenham they are in the process of planning and negotiating, with the aim of providing around three forms of entry, through a combination of some purpose expansion and some bulge classes.


Michael Abrahams, chair of Forest Hill Society and local resident highlighted the problems in the area , where children who live 253 m away from the school are not getting spaces when children who live 250 m away are. They are then having to attend schools that are further away with no direct buses to get to them.


Q1. I don’t understand why school places weren’t put in the local area rather than a mile or a mile and a half away?

A1. It was based on a financial decision that the Council had to take when looking at value for money. The Council is very sympathetic to those who have to travel further, the legal guidelines are stated as up to 2 miles away but we do try to accommodate classes as close as possible to the area whilst looking at best value and budget limitations.

Q2 Down the road from the Horniman, the Council have bought a building that

is to be used for housing, why hasn’t it been used for education purposes?

A2. The Council has a responsibility, legally and morally to provide a range of Services. Homelessness has increased, the borough has restricted use of land as well and this decision has been taken to try to balance these competing priorities.

Q3 Is the situation at the Horniman permanent?

A3. Feasibility is being looked at. The Council would like to offer places there but whether this can happen is yet to be decided.

Q4 Will those attending bulge classes now get places in secondary schools?

A4. We are looking at the potential expansion of a couple of schools through using other sites and exploring financial avenues. The cost of building a new school costs around 25 million and we are also looking at who might be the provider of a new school.

Cllr Upex asked Cllr Maslin and Chris to come back to the assembly at a future time to update on these issues. They agreed to do so.



On the other hand, Council is facing the biggest overspend in dealing with homelessness. Currently the need is increasing and available properties decreasing resulting in more families being placed in temporary and nightly accommodation which have ended in £3m overspend this year. Redeveloping Hamilton Lodge is just one way of dealing with the increased homelessness issue the borough faces. I will not write further on this issue as it is included on our assembly agenda for 17th February to which everyone is invited to attend.

Have the days when politicians and councillors can waffle on
giving out answers to important local issues like school places that
rather than alleviate the problems, actually exacerbates them and then
Try to hide behind political correctness and peoples social conscience;
now gone?
The wool over my eyes has been removed for a while now.

By creating a homeless unit our council are expecting more Labour voters, If the building is used to extend our schools they will not. Nothing to do with financial constraints me thinks.

Maja

With respect to you and Paul.

Whilst it may have been discussed nothing is being done to address the shortage or to actively engage with residents on this very point.

If you look at the Fairlawn playground at lunchtimes it is unbelieveably overcrowded. There are two bulge classes there currently from previous years making 16 classes and approximately 480 pupils on a fairly restructed site. Lunchtime bruises and bumps are ever present. I get called frequently about it.

As a parent I will be resisting the imposition of any further bulge classes at Fairlawn as I do not see why certain schools- and children - should bear the brunt of overcrowding.

Its common knowledge that federating is the way to legitimately expand state schools. However I would at this moment even welcome Harris there which is quite a seachange from me.

May I also ask why the next meeting is at Wells Park which is a fair distance away from Forest Hill?

Usual rubbish from the Council and I think our local councillors have made it abundantly clear that the Labour run administration believe that addressing the homeless problem is more important than the school overcrowding problem.

As for shortage of funds it is a bit rich for the Council to say that money is a problem when the continue to waste money on Lewisham Life. In our household it goes from doormat to recycle in one flowing movement. It is just a shame we can't do that with Lewisham and its elected representatives.

They could also save money by sacking some of their more useless employees like the one who spent over two hours on the phone trying to get our of her mobile phone contract last time I was in the Council offices. Is that how you like to see the Council spending your money?

As for the Council applying for planning permission I wonder if they are going to be successful? Ten objections or whatever it is and it goes to the Planning Committee. Not to worry, in the one party state that is Lewisham, the good guys always win.

Quite frankly we have all been stitched up by the usual suspects.

Why will Cllr Hilton "not write further on this (…until…) 17th February?" Silenced until then perhaps?

Note also Cllr Upex's post of 1st August 2014. Towing the party line?

roz - check the date and applicant on that link you posted. Makes you wonder who had what idea when.

Just when I thought things couldn't get any worse I turn on the local late night news and had to listen to Lewisham's tenth term Mayor being interviewed about guess what? The homeless crisis.

So that's clearly the party line.