Agenda item

Response to Sydenham Society on Our Lady and St Philip Neri School

Having considered an officer report, and a presentations by the Sydenham

Society, the Education Commission of the Archdiocese of Southwark, Ward

Councillors and the Director of Planning, the Mayor and Cabinet agreed that

the contents of the response be approved and reported back to the

Sydenham Assembly.

Comments of the Sustainable Development Select Committee on the Responses received on Fire Safety and on Pubs

RESOLVED: That the relevant Executive Directors be asked to prepare a response for Mayoral consideration

Review by the Children & Young People Select Committee on Exclusions

RESOLVED: That the Executive Director for Children & Young People be asked to prepare a response for Mayoral consideration.

Comments of the Sustainable Development Select Committee on Catford Regeneration

RESOLVED: That the Executive Director for Resources & Regeneration be asked to prepare a response for Mayoral consideration.

Response to Sydenham Society on Our Lady and St Philip Neri School

The submission that had unanimously been agreed by the Sydenham

Assembly was introduced by Annabel McLaren, the Chair of the Sydenham

Society. She tabled a document setting out the Society’s concerns relating to

the breach of the original planning conditions and called for the drawing up of

a separate legal document which ensures that required works were urgently

completed. She was supported by Julia Webb who agreed that it was

important that a solution was agreed which ensured the school buildings

reached completion. They suggested that the developers preference for re-

cladding of the building with grey pebbledash should be replaced with panels

faced with slips of London stock brick.

The Director of Planning, Emma Talbot introduced the suggested response

report and confirmed a minor material amendment application was likely to be

considered by a Planning Committee in August. She indicated that in parallel

the authority reserved the right to retain an option for enforcement action.

Dr Hughes, Director of Education, responded on behalf of the Education

Commission of the Archdiocese of Southwark. He stated two public meetings

had strongly supported the application and he claimed the views of the

Sydenham Society were not representative of the wider community. He said

legal advice given to him suggested the minor material amendment

application would bring the building back into line with the original application

and that there was no need for a full application. He claimed the original

scheme was as drawn up by the Borough Architects, but Councillor Bell

pointed out the authority did not have an architects section. Dr Hughes 

confirmed Home Park was already the school’s main entrance.

Councillor Paul Bell expressed shock at the apparent belligerent stance

adopted by the Commission. He wondered why no apology had been given

when it was clear the building was not in line with the original planning

consent.

Sean McGrath, a Planning consultant for the Education Commission

explained the original consent had not proved buildable and the failure to

identify a safe asbestos free decant option had meant children were on site

during the building process which was a considerable complicating factor. He

said a full apology for the applicant’s failings had been given at a public

meeting in January. He said the Commission were striving to get back to the

original scheme and pointed out London stock bricks had never been

consented with cladding always being intended. In answer to a query from

Councillor Best as to why the cladding promised by architects Pollard Thomas

Edwards had not been delivered, Mr McGrath said the cladding had not been

completed as works had been suspended until the planning situation could be

rectified.

The Director of Planning stated she believed the Commission’s response

misrepresented legitimate community concerns and that in her opinion the

cladding currently visible on site was unacceptable. She acknowledged some

representations supporting the school had been received.

Local Ward Councillor Tom Copley said he had chaired the Sydenham

Assembly meeting where the reference had been unanimously agreed and he

believed the scheme’s critics were not a small minority of the community.

Councillor Chris Best expressed her severe disappointment with the

implementation of the scheme and indicated her support for the views

emanating from the Sydenham Society.

The Mayor concluded by thanking the Sydenham Assembly and the

Sydenham Society for highlighting this case. He hoped the Commission was

hearing the message that their conduct had been unacceptable and their

response to valid criticisms was very disappointing. He urged the Commission

to engage the wider community in the delivery of an acceptable solution

Having considered an officer report, and a presentations by the Sydenham

Society, the Education Commission of the Archdiocese of Southwark, Ward

Councillors and the Director of Planning, the Mayor and Cabinet

RESOLVED that the contents of the response be approved and reported back

to the Sydenham Assembly.

Comments of the Sustainable Development Select Committee on the Responses received on Fire Safety and on Pubs

RESOLVED: that the relevant Executive Directors be asked to prepare a response for Mayoral consideration

Review by the Children & Young People Select Committee on Exclusions

RESOLVED: that the Executive Director for Children & Young People be asked to prepare a response for Mayoral consideration.

Comments of the Sustainable Development Select Committee on Catford Regeneration

RESOLVED: that the Executive Director for Resources & Regeneration be asked to prepare a response for Mayoral consideration.